^  n](i\  ii\(i)  (])j^ 


iv.lr  Jra.   .lie 


PRINCETON,    N.    J. 


Shelf. 


Division .  .t^.  .>»?.  .W..\..J 
Section  ..,'  (..{.7R.2..6 
Number 


Egypt  and  Babylon 


SACRED  AND  PROFANE  SOURCES 


EGYPT  AND  BABYLON 


FROM 


SACRED  AND   PROFANE   SOURCES 


BY 

/ 
GEORGE   RAWLINSON,  M.  A. 

CAMDEN   PROFESSOR   OK   ANCIENT   HISTORY,   OXFORD;    CANON  OF 
CANTERBURY   CATHEDRAL 


NEW  YORK 

CHARLES   SCRIBNER'S   SONS 

188.5 


GRANT   &   PAIRES, 
PHILADELPHIA. 


-.     ^.r.    ^^   \J    mJ  '\J'    '-^  '■^    *- 


'■rvr*"'v"T'^^ 


CONTENTS 


CHAPTER   I. 
Notices  of  Babylon  in  the  Book  of  Genesis,      .    .      i 

CHAPTER   II. 
Notices   of   Babylon   in  the  Books  of  Kings  and 

Chronicles,       13 

CHAPTER  III. 
Further   Notices   of   Babylon    in   the   Books    of 

Kings  and  Chronicles, 27 

CHAPTER  IV. 
Notices  of  Babylon  in  Daniel, 40 

CHAPTER  V. 

Further  Notices  of  Babylon  in  Daniel,      ....     53 

CHAPTER   VI. 
Further  Notices  of  Babylon  in  Daniel,      ....    67 

CHAPTER  VII. 
Notices  of  Babylon  in  Jeremiah  and  Ezekiel,    .     .    82 


VI 


CONTENTS. 


CHAPTER  VIII. 
Further  Notices  of  Babylon  in  Ezekiel,     .     .     .     .    95 

CHAPTER  IX. 
Further  Notices  of  Babylon  in  Daniel,      .     .    .     .111 

CHAPTER  X. 
P'urther  Notices  of  Babylon  in  Daniel,      .     .    '.     .125 

CHAPTER   XL 
Notices   of    Babylon  in   Daniel,   Isaiah,  Jeremiah, 

AND  Ezekiel, .     .     .138 

CHAPTER  XII. 
Further  Notices  of  Babylon  in   Isaiah  and  Jere- 
miah,       152 

CHAPTER  Xlll. 
Notices  of  Egypt  in  Genesis, .  165 

CHAPTER   XIV. 
Further  Notices  of  Egypt  in  Genesis, 180 

CHAPTER   XV. 
Notices  of  Egypt  in  Exodus .    ...  194 

CHAPTER   XVI. 
Further  Notices  of  Egypt  in  Exodus,     .....  208 

CHAPTER  XVII. 
Notices  of  Egypt  in  Exodus  and  Numbers,      .  ' .    .  222 

CHAPTER   XVIII. 
Further  Notices  of  Egypt  in  Exodus, 236 


CONTENTS. 


CHAPTER  XIX.  PAGE 

Notices  of  Egypt  in  the  First  Book  of  Kings,  .    .  250 

CHAPTER  XX. 
Notices  of  Egypt  in  the  Second  Book  of  Kings,    .  263 

CHAPTER   XXI. 
Notices  of  Egypt  in  Isaiah 276 

CHAPTER   XXII. 
Notices  of  Egypt  in  Jeremiah  and  Ezekiel,   .    .    .  290 

CHAPTER  XXIII. 
Notices  of  Egypt  in  Daniel, 304 

CHAPTER   XXIV. 
Further  Notices  of  Egypt  in  Daniel, 317 


EGYPT  AND  BABYLON. 


CHAPTER   I. 

NOTICES    OF    BABYLON    IN    THE    BOOK    OF    GENESIS. 

"  Cush  begat  Nimrod  :  he  began  to  be  a  mighty  one  in  the  earth.  He 
was  a  mighty  hunter  before  the  Lord :  wherefore  it  is  said,  Even  as 
Nimrod,  the  mighty  hunter  before  the  Lord.  And  the  beginning  of 
his  kingdom  was  Babel,  and  Erech,  and  Accad,  and  Calneh,  in  the 
land  of  Shinar." — Gen.  x.  8-io. 

That  this  passage  refers  to  Babylon  will  scarcely  be 
disputed.  The  words  "  Babel  "  and  "  Shinar  "  are 
sufficient  proof.  "  Babel,"  elsewhere  generally  trans- 
lated "Babylon"  (2  Kings  xx.  12;  xxiv.  i  ;  2  Chron. 
xxxii,  31 ;  xxxiii.  II  ;  Ps.  cxxxvii.  I,  etc.),  is  the  exact 
Hebrew  equivalent  of  the  native  Babily  which  appears 
as  the  capital  of  Babylonia  in  the  cuneiform  records 
from  the  time  of  Agu-kak-rimi  (about  B.C.  2000) 
to  the  conquest  of  the  country  by  Cyrus  (b.c.  538). 
"  Shinar  "  is  probably  an  equivalent  of  "  Mesopotamia," 
"  the   country   of  the   two  rivers,"  and   in   Scripture 


BAB YL ON  AND  EGYPT. 


always  designates  the  lower  part  of  the  Tigris  and 
Euphrates  valley,  the  alluvial  plain  through  which  the 
great  rivers  flow  before  reaching  the  Persian  Gulf 

Four  facts  are  recorded  of  Babylonia  in  the  pas- 
sage:— I.  That  it  became  at  a  very  early  date  a  settled 
government  under  a  king ;  2.  That  it  contained,  besides 
Babylon,  at  least  three  other  great  cities — Erech, 
Accad,  Calneh ;  3.  That  among  its  earliest  rulers  was 
a  great  conquering  monarch  named  Nimrod ;  and  4. 
That  this  monarch,  and  therefore  probably  his  people, 
descended  from  Cush — i.e.^  was  a  Cushite,  or  Ethio- 
pian. 

The  first  of  these  facts  is  confirmed  by  Berosus,  by 
Diodorus  Siculus,  and  by  the  monuments.  Berosus 
declared  that  a  monarchy  had  been  set  up  in  Babylon 
soon  after  the  flood,  which  he  regarded  as  a  real  oc- 
currence, and  counted  208  kings  from  Evechoiis,  the 
first  monarch,  to  Pul,  the  predecessor  of  Tiglath-Pileser. 
Diodorus  believed  that  Babylon  had  been  built  by 
Semiramis,  the  wife  of  Ninus,  at  a  date  which,  accord- 
ing to  his  chronology,  would  be  about  B.C.  2200.  The 
monuments  furnish  above  ninety  names  of  kings  ante- 
rior to  Tiglath-Pileser,  and  carry  back  the  monarchy 
by  actual  numerical  statements  to  B.C. 2286,  v/hile  the 
super-position  of  the  remains  is  considered  by  the 
explorers  to  indicate  an  even  greater  antiquity.  An 
early  Babylonian  kingdom,  once  denied  on  the  author- 
ity of  Ctesias,  js  now  generally  allowed  by  historians ; 
the  researches  of  Sir  Henry  Rawlinson,  Mr.  George 
Smith,    Professor    Sayce,    Mr.   Pinches,   and    others, 


NOTICES  IN  GENESIS. 


having    sufficiently   established    the    fact    previously- 
questioned. 

The  second  fact — the  early  existence  of  several 
large  cities  in  Babylonia,  cities  ranking  almost  upon  a 
par — is  also  strongly  supported  by  the  native  records. 
In  the  most  ancient  times  to  which  the  monuments  go 
back,  the  chief  cities,  according  to  Mr.  George  Smith,^ 
were  Ur,  Nipur,  Karrak,  and  Larsa,  all  of  them  met- 
ropolitan, and  all  of  them  places  giving  their  titles  to 
kings.  Somewhat  later,  Babylon  and  Erech  rose  to 
greatness,  together  with  a  city  called  Agade,  or  Accad, 
according  to  the  same  authority.^  If  this  last  identi- 
fication be  allowed,  then  three  out  of  the  four  cities 
mentioned  in  Genesis  as  metropolitan  at  this  early 
date  will  have  the  same  rank  in  the  native  records, 
and  one  only  of  the  four  names  will  lack  such  direct 
confirmation.  Certainly,  no  name  at  all  resembling 
Calneh  occurs  in  the  primitive  geography  of  Baby- 
lonia. There  are,  however,  grounds  for  regarding 
Calneh  as  another  name  of  Nipur,^  and  one  which 
superseded  it  for  a  time  in  the  nomenclature  of  the 
inhabitants.  In  this  case  we  may  say  that  all  the  four 
cities  of  Genesis  x.  lo  are  identified,  and  shown  to 
have  had  (about  b.  c.  2000)  the  eminence  ascribed  to 
them  in  that  passage.  Mr.  George  Smith's  reading  of 
"  Agade  "  is,  however,  questioned  by  some,  who  read 

^"History  of  Babylonia"  (edited  by  Rev.  A.  H  Sayce),  ch.  iii.,  pp. 
63-74. 

2  Ibid.,  p.  61. 

'Smith's  "Dictionary  of  the  Bible,"  advoc.  Calneh. 


BAB  YL  ON  AND  EG  YPT. 


the  name  "  Agane."  If  this  latter  reading  be  correct, 
the  city  Accad  must  be  regarded  as  at  present  not 
identified. 

The  third  fact — the  reign  of  a  powerful  king,  called 
Nimrod,  over  Babylonia  has  not  as  yet  received  any 
confirmation  from  the  monuments.  It  is  suspected 
that  the  monarch  so  called  had  two  names,  and  that, 
while  Scripture  uses  one  of  them,  the  Babylonian 
documents  employ  the  other.  Mr.  George  Smith  pro- 
posed to  identify  the  scriptural  Nimrod  with  a  certain 
Izdubar,  a  semi-mythical,  semi-historical  personage, 
very  prominent  in  the  primitive  legends.  But  the 
identification  is  a  pure  conjecture.  The  monuments 
must  be  regarded  as  silent  with  respect  to  Nimrod, 
and  we  must  look  elsewhere  for  traces  of  his  existence 
and  authority.  Such  traces  are  numerous  in  the 
traditions  of  the  East,  and  among  the  early  Jewish  and 
Arabic  writers.  Josephus  tells  us  that  Nimrod  lived 
at  the  time  when  the  attempt  was  made  to  build  the 
Tower  of  Babel,  and  represents  him  as  the  prime  mover 
in  that  impious  enterprise.  The  Mohammedans  have 
a  tradition  that  he  lived  somewhat  later,  and  was 
brought  into  contact  with  Abraham,  whom  he 
attempted  to  burn  to  death  in  a  furnace  of  fire.  In 
Arabian  astronomy  he  appears  as  a  giant  who  at  his 
decease  was  translated  to  heaven,  and  transformed  into 
the  constellation  which  the  Arabs  called  El  Jabbar, 
"  the  Giant,"  and  the  Greeks  Orion.  These  tales  have, 
of  course,  but  little  value  in  themselves ;  they  are 
merely  important  as  showing  how  large  a  space  this 


NOTICES  IN  GENESIS. 


monarch  occupied  in  the  imaginations  of  the  Eastern 
races,  a  fact  only  to  be  accounted  for  by  his  having  once 
filled  a  prominent  position.  That  position  is  declared 
in  the  "  Nabathaean  Agriculture,"  an  Arabic  work  of 
great  antiquity,  to  have  been  the  position  of  a  king 
the  founder  of  a  dynasty  which  long  bore  sway  over 
the  land.  Another  sign  of  the  reality  of  Nimrod's 
rule  is  to  be  found  in  the  attachment  of  his  name  to 
various  sites  in  the  Mesopotamian  region.  The 
remarkable  ruin  generally  called  Akkerkuf,  which  lies 
a  little  to  the  south-west  of  Baghdad,  is  known  to 
many  as  the  "  Tel-Nimrud ; "  the  great  dam  across  the 
Tigris  below  Mosul  is  the  "  Sahr-el-Nimrud ; "  one  of 
the  chief  of  the  buried  cities  in  the  same  neighbour- 
hood is  called  "  Nimrud  "  simply  ;  and  the  name  of 
"  Birs-Nimrud  "  attaches  to  the  grandest  mass  of  ruins 
in  the  lower  country.^ 

The  fourth  fact — that  Nimrod,  and  therefore  pro- 
bably his  people,  was  of  Cushite  origin,  has  been 
strenuously  denied  by  some,  even  among  modern 
critics.^  But  ancient  classical  tradition  and  recent 
linguistic  research  agree  in  establishing  a  close  con- 
nection between  the  early  inhabitants  of  the  lower 
Mesopotamian  plain  and  the  people,  which,  under  the 
various  names  of  Cushites,  Ethiopians,  and  Abyssin- 
ians,  has  long  been  settled  upon  the  middle  Nile. 
Memnon,  king  of  Ethiopia,  according  to  Hesiod  and 
Pindar,  led  an  army  of  combined  Ethiopians  and  Susi- 

^  See  Rich's  "Journey  to  Babylon,"  p.  2,  note. 
2  See  Bunsen's  "Philosophy  of  History,"  vol.  iii.,  pp.  190,  191. 
I* 


BAB  YLON  AND  EG  YPT. 


anians  to  the  assistance  of  Priam,  king  of  Troy.  Belus, 
according  to  the  genealogists,  was  the  son  of  Libya  (or 
Africa) ;  he  married  Anchinoe,  daughter  of  Nilus,  and 
had  issue  yEgyptus.  Names  which  are  modifications 
of  Cush  have  always  hung  about  the  lower  Mesopo- 
tamian  region,  indicating  its  primitive  connection  with 
the  Cush  upon  the  Nile.  The  Greeks  called  the 
Susianians  "  Kissii,"  and  a  neighbouring  race  **  Kosssei." 
The  early  Babylonians  had  a  city,  "  Kissi,"  and  a  lead- 
ing tribe  in  their  country  was  called  that  of  the  **  Kassu." 
Even  now  the  ancient  Susiania  is  known  as  '*  Khuzis- 
tan,"  the  land  of  Khuz,  or  of  the  Cushites.  Standing 
alone,  these  would  be  weak  arguments  ;  but  weight  is 
lent  them  by  the  support  which  they  obtain  from  the 
facts  of  language.  Sir  Henry  Rawlinson,  the  first 
translator  of  primitive  Babylonian  documents,  declares 
the  vocabulary  employed  to  be  "  decidedly  Cushite  or 
Ethiopian,"  and  states  that  he  was  able  to  interpret  the 
inscriptions  chiefly  by  the  aid  which  was  furnished  to 
him  from  published  works  on  the  Galla  (Abyssinian) 
and  the  Mahra  (South  Arabian)  dialects.^ 

"  The  whole  earth  was  of  one  language  and  of  one  speech.  And  it 
came  to  pass,  as  they  journeyed  from  the  east  (eastward,  inarg^,  that 
they  found  a  plain  in  the  land  of  Shinar ;  and  they  dwelt  there.  And 
they  said  one  to  another,  Go  to,  let  us  make  brick,  and -burn  them 
throughly.  And  they  had  brick  for  stone,  and  slime  had  they  for 
mortar.  And  they  said.  Go  to,  let  us  build  us  a  city  and  a  tower,  whose 
top  may  reach  unto  heaven ;  and  let  us  make  us  a  name',  lest  we  be 
scattered  abroad  upon  the  face  of  the  whole  earth.  And  the  Lord  came 
down  to  see  the  city  and  the  tower,  which  the  children  of  men  builded. 

^  See  the  author's  "  Herodotus,"  vol.  i.,  p.  441. 


NOTICES  IN  GENESIS. 


And  the  Lord  said,  Behold,  the  people  is  one,  and  they  have  all  one 
language ;  and  this  they  begin  to  do ;  and  now  nothing  will  be  restrained 
from  them,  which  they  have  imagined  to  do.  Go  to,  let  us  go  down, 
and  there  confound  their  language,  that  they  may  not  understand  one 
another's  speech.  So  the  Lord  scattered  them  abroad  from  thence  upon 
the  face  of  all  the  earth ;  and  they  left  off  to  build  the  city.  Therefore 
is  the  name  of  it  called  Babel,  because  the  Lord  did  there  confound  the 
language  of  all  the  earth ;  and  from  thence  did  the  Lord  scatter  them 
abroad  upon  the  face  of  all  the  earth." — Gen.  xi.  1-9. 

We  have  here  the  scriptural  account  of  the  meaning 
of  the  name  *'  Babel,"  the  primitive  term  which  the 
Greeks  converted  into  *'  Babylon,"  but  which  remains 
even  now  attached  to  a  portion  of  the  ruins  that  mark 
the  site  of  the  great  city,  almost  in  its  original  form.^ 
The  etymology  was  not  accepted  by  the  Babylonians 
themselves,  who  wrote  the  word  in  a  way  which  shows 
that  they  considered  it  to  mean  "  the  Gate  of  God." 
This  has  been  regarded  by  some  as  a  contradiction  of 
the  scriptural  account;  but  we  may  reconcile  the  two 
by  supposing  either  that  the  name  was  first  given  in 
scorn,  and  that  afterwards  a  better  meaning  was  found 
for  it,  or  (more  probably)  that  the  word,  having 
been  intended  by  the  Babylonians  themselves  in 
the  sense  of  "  the  Gate  of  God,"  was  from  the  first 
understood  in  a  different  sense  by  others,  who  con- 
nected it  with  the  "  confusion "  of  tongues.  The 
word  is  capable  of  both  etymologies,  and  may  from 
the  first  have  been  taken  in  both  senses  by  different 
persons. 

^  The  northernmost  of  the  three  great  mounds  which  mark  the  ruins 
of  Babylon  is  called  by  the  Arabs  Babil. 


8  BABYL ON  AND  EGYPT. 

The  account  of  the  origin  of  the  name  is  connected 
with  an  historical  narrative,  of  which  the  following  are 
the  chief  incidents: — i.  A  body  of  men,  who  had 
occupied  the  plain  of  Shinar,  disliking  the  idea  of  that 
dispersion  which  was  continually  taking  place,  and 
scattering  men  more  and  more  widely  over  the  earth, 
determined  to  build  a  city,  and  to  adorn  it  with  a  lofty 
tower,  in  order  that  they  might  get  themselves  a  name, 
and  become  a  centre  of  attraction  in  the  world.  2. 
The  materials  which  they  found  to  their  hand,  and 
which  they  employed  in  building,  were  burnt  brick 
and  "  slime,"  or  bitumen.  3.  They  had  built  their 
city,  and  raised  their  tower  to  a  certain  height,  when 
God  interfered  with  their  work.  By  confounding  the 
language  of  the  workmen,  He  made  it  impossible  for 
them  to  understand  each  other's  speech,  and  the  result 
was  that  the  design,  for  the  time  at  least,  fell  through. 
The  people  "  left  off  to  build  the  city,"  and  the  mass 
of  them  dispersed,  and  **  were  scattered  abroad  upon 
the  face  of  the  earth." 

It  would  not  have  been  surprising  if  profane  history 
had  contained  no  notice  of  this  matter.  It  belongs 
clearly  to  a  very  remote  antiquity,  a  time  anterior — 
as  it  might  have  been  supposed — to  records,  and  lost 
in  the  dark  night  of  ages.  But  the  fact  seems  to  be 
that  the  Babylonians  either  recorded  at  the  time,  or  at 
any  rate  bore  in  memory,  the  transaction.  Two 
Greek  writers,  who  drew  their  Babylonian  histories 
from  native  sources,  noticed  the  occurrence,  and  gave 
an  account  of  it,  which  is  in  most  respects  very  close 


NOTICES  IN  GENESIS. 


to  the  biblical  narrative.  Alexander  Polyhistor  said, 
that  **  Once  upon  a  time,  when  the  whole  race  of  man- 
kind were  of  one  language,  a  certain  number  of  them 
set  to  work  to  build  a  great  tower,  thinking  to  climb 
up  to  heaven;  but  God  caused  a  wind  to  blow,  and 
cast  the  tower  down,  at  the  same  time  giving  to  every 
man  his  own  peculiar  speech.  On  which  account  the 
city  was  called  Babylon."  Abydenus,  a  somewhat 
later  historian,  treated  the  subject  at  greater  length. 
"  At  this  time,"  he  said,  "  the  ancient  race  of  men  were 
so  puffed  up  with  their  strength  and  tallness  of  stature, 
that  they  began  to  despise  and  contemn  the  gods,  and 
laboured  to  erect  that  very  lofty  tower,  which  is  now 
called  Babylon,  intending  thereby  to  scale  heaven. 
But  when  the  building  approached  the  sky,  behold, 
the  gods  called  in  the  aid  of  the  winds,  and  by  their 
help  overthrew  the  tower,  and  cast  it  to  the  ground. 
The  name  of  the  ruins  is  still  called  Babel ;  because 
until  this  time  all  men  had  used  the  same  speech,  but 
now  there  was  sent  upon  them  a  confusion  of  many 
and  diverse  tongues." 

These  passages  have  long  been  known,  and  have 
been  adduced  as  probable  evidence  that  the  native 
Babylonian  records  contained  a  notice  respecting  the 
tower  of  Babel  and  the  confusion  of  human  speech. 
But  it  is  only  recently  that  such  a  record  has  been 
unearthed.  Among  the  clay  tablets  brought  from 
Babylonia  by  Mr.  George  Smith,  and  deposited  in  the 
British  Museum,  is  one  unfortunately  much  mutilated, 
which  seems  clearly  to  have  contained  the  Babylonian 


BAB  YL  ON  AND  EG  YPT. 


account  of  the  matter.      The  main  portions  of  this 
document  are  as  follows  : — 

"  Babylon  corruptly  to  sin  went,  and 

Small  and  great  were  mingled  on  the  mound ; 
Babylon  corruptly  to  sin  went,  and 

Small  and  great  were  mingled  on  the  mound. 

*  *  -Jfr  -x- 
Their  work  all  day  they  builded ; 

But  to  their  stronghold  in  the  night 

Entirely  an  end  God  made. 
In  His  anger  also  His  secret  counsel  He  poured  forth. 

He  set  His  face  to  scatter ; 
He  gave  command  to  make  strange  their  speech ; 

Their  progress  He  impeded, 
•jf-  -x-  -K-  * 

In  that  day  He  blew,  and  for  [all]  future  time 

The  mountain  (was  demolished  ?) ; 
Lawlessness  stalked  forth  abroad  ; 

And,  though  God  spake  to  them, 
Men  went  their  ways,  and  strenuously 

Opposed  themselves  to  God. 
He  saw,  and  to  the  earth  came  down; 

No  stop  He  made,  while  they 
Against  the  gods  revolted  .... 

*  *  -Sf  * 
Greatly  they  wept  for  Babylon ; 

Greatly  they  wept."  ^ 

"It  came  to  pass  in  the  days  of  Amraphel,  king  of  Shinar,  Arioch, 
king  of  Ellasar,  Chedorlaomer,  king  of  Elam,  and  Tidal,  king  of 
nations,  that  these  made  war  with  Bera,  king  of  Sodom,  and  with 
Birsha,  king  of  GomoiTah,  Shinab,  king  of  Admah,  and  Shemeber, 
king  of  Zeboiim,  and  the  king  of  Bela,  which  is  Zoar.  All  these  were 
joined  together  in  the  vale  of  Siddim,  which  is  the  salt  sea.  Twelve 
years  they  served  Chedorlaomer," — Gen.  xiv.  1-4. 

^  See  "Records  of  the  Past,"  vol.  vii.,  pp.  131,  132. 


NOTICES  IN  GENESIS. 


The  chief  fact  relating  to  Babylon,  which  this  pas- 
sage contains,  is  its  subjection  in  the  time  of  Abraham 
to  a  neighbouring  country  called  here  Elam.  Amra- 
phel,  the  king  of  Shinar,  the  country  whereof  Babylon 
was  the  capital  (Gen.  x.  lo;  xi.  2-9),  is  plainly,  in  the 
entire  narrative  (Gen.  xiv.  1-17),  secondary  and  sub- 
ordinate to  Chedorlaomer,  king  of  Elam.  The  con- 
quered monarchs  "serve"  Chedorlaomer  (ver.  4),  not 
Amraphel ;  Chedorlaomer  leads  both  expeditions,  the 
other  kings  are  **  with  him"  (vers.  5,  17),  as  subordinate 
allies,  or,  more  probably,  as  tributaries.  This  is  an 
inversion  of  the  usual  position  occupied  by  Babylonia 
towards  its  eastern  neighbour,  of  which,  until  recently, 
there  was  no  profane  confirmation. 

Recently,  however,  traces  have  been  found  of  an 
Elamitic  conquest  of  Babylon,  and  also  of  an  Elamitic 
dynasty  there  at  an  early  date,  which  show  that 
there  were  times  when  the  more  eastern  of  the  two 
countries  which  lay  side  by  side  upon  the  Lower 
Tigris  had  the  greater  power,  and  exercised  dominion 
over  the  more  western.  Asshur-bani-pal,  the  son  of 
Esar-haddon,  relates  that  in  his  eighteenth  year  (b.  c. 
651)  he  restored  to  the  Babylonian  city  of  Erech 
certain  images  of  gods,  which  had  been  carried  off 
from  them  as  trophies  of  victory  1635  years  previously 
by  Kudur-Nakhunta,  king  of  Elam,  to  adorn  his 
capital  city  of  Susa.^  The  primitive  Babylonian  mon- 
uments also  show  a  second  conquest  of  Babylon  from 
the  same  quarter,  and  the  establishment  of  a  dynasty 

1" Ancient  Monarchies,"  vol.  i.,  p.  446;  "Origin  of  Nations,"  p.  37. 


BAB  YL  ON  AND  E  G  YPT. 


there,  which  is  known  as  "  Elamite,"  ^  about  B.C.  1600, 
or  a  little  later.  This  dynasty  consisted  of  two  kings, 
Kudur-Mabuk  and  Rim-agu  (a  name  which  has  been 
compared  with  "Arioch"). 

It  is  thus  evident  that  Elam  was,  in  the  early  period 
of  Babylonian  history,  a  country  of  about  equal  power 
with  Babylon,  and  one  which  was  able  from  time  to 
time  to  exercise  dominion  over  her  neighbour.  It 
appears  also  that  its  kings  affected,  as  one  of  the 
elements  in  their  names,  the  word  "  Chedor "  or 
"  Kudur,"  which  is  believed  to  have  meant  "  servant," 
— Chedorlaomer  (or  Chedor-Lagamer,  as  the  word 
might  be  transliterated)  being  "  the  servant  of  Laga- 
mer,"  a  Susianian  god,  Kudur-Nakhunta,  "  the  servant 
of  Nakhunta,"  another  god;  and  Kudur-Mabuk,  "the 
servant  of  Mabuk,"  a  goddess.  We  may  add,  that 
"  Amar  "  (=Amra  in  "  Amra-phel  ")  appears  also  as  a 
root  in  the  early  Babylonian  titles,^  while  Arioch  is 
perhaps  identical  with  the  name  of  Rim-agu  (or  Eri- 
aku),  Kudur-Mabuk's  son  and  successor.  Thus  the 
notice  in  Gen.  xiv.  1-4,  without  being  directly  con- 
firmed by  the  monuments,  is  in  close  harmony  with 
them,  both  linguistic  and  historical. 

^George  Smith's  "  History  of  Babylonia,"  pp.  II,  74. 
2  Ibid.,  p.  10. 


CHAPTER  II. 

NOTICES    OF    BABYLON     IN     THE     BOOKS    OF    KINGS 
AND    CHRONICLES. 

Scripture  is  silent  on  the  subject  of  Babylon  through 
the  whole  period  from  Genesis  to  Kings.^  Israel,  during 
the  sojourn  in  Egypt,  the  wanderings  in  the  wilderness, 
the  time  of  the  Judges,  and  the  greater  part  of  the  time 
of  the  Kings,  was  never  brought  in  contact  with  Baby- 
lonia or  Babylonians  ;  and  Scripture,  which  traces  the 
religious  history  of  the  people  of  God,  has  therefore  no 
occasion  to  mention  the  southern  Mesopotamian  power. 
Another  power  has  interposed  itself  between  Israel 
and  Babylon — the  great  empire  of  Assyria — and  has 
barred  the  path  by  which  alone  they  could  readily 
communicate.  It  is  not  till  Assyria,  under  the  Sargo- 
nidae,  is  seriously  threatening  the  independence  of 
both  countries,  that  a  common  danger  brings  them 
together,  and  Babylon  once  more  claims  the  attention 
of  the  sacred  historians.  The  first  notice  of  Babylon 
in  the  Books  of  Kings  is  the  following : — 

^The   "Babylonish   garment"    coveted   by  Achan    (Josh.   vii.    21) 
scarcely  constitutes  an  exception. 

2  13 


14  BAB YL ON  AND  EGYPT. 

*' At  that  time  "  (the  time  of  Hezekiah's  illness)  '*  Berodach-Baladan, 
the  son  of  Baladan,  king  of  Babylon,  sent  letters  and  a  present  unto 
Hezekiah :  for  he  had  heard  that  Hezekiah  had  been  sick,  'And  Heze- 
kiah  hearkened  unto  them,  and  showed  them  all  the  house  of  his 
precious  things,  the  silver,  and  the  gold,  and  the  spices,  and  the  precious 
ointment,  and  all  the  house  of  his  annour,  and  all  that  was  found  in  his 
treasures :  there  was  nothing  in  his  house,  nor  in  all  his  dominion,  that 
Hezekiah  showed  them  not." — 2  Kings  xx.  12,  13. 

The  same  circumstance  is  related,  almost  in  the  same 
words,  by  the  prophet  Isaiah,  in  one  of  his  historical 
chapters.     Isaiah  says — 

"  At  that  time  Merodach-Baladan,  the  son  of  Baladan,  king  of  Baby- 
lon, sent  letters  and  a  present  to  Hezekiah ;  for  he  had  heard  that  he 
had  been  sick,  and  was  recovered.  And  Hezekiah  was  glad  of  them, 
and  showed  them  the  house  of  his  precious  things,  the  silver,  and  the 
gold,"  etc. — ISA.  xxxix.  i,  2. 

The  author  of  Chronicles,  without  relating  the 
circumstance,  makes  a  short  comment  upon  it.  After 
describing  the  riches,  honour,  and  prosperity  of  Heze- 
kiah, he  adds — 

"  Howbeit  in  the  business  of  the  ambassadors  of  the  princes  of  Baby- 
lon, who  sent  unto  him  to  inquire  of  the  wonder  that  was  done  in  the 
land,  God  left  him  to  try  him,  that  he  might  know  all  that  was  in  his 
heart." — 2  Chron.  xxxii.  31. 

The  reign  of  a  Babylonian  monarch,  called  Mero- 
dach-Baladan, at  about  the  period  indicated — the  latter 
part  of  the  eighth  century  B.C. — is  recorded  in  the 
famous  "  Canon  of  Ptolemy,"  which  assigns  him  the 
years  between  B.C.  722  and  B.C.  710.  That  the  same 
monarch,   after   being   deprived   of   his   throne,   was 


NOTICES  IN  KINGS  AND  CHRONICLES.  15 

restored  to  it,  and  had  a  second  reign  of  six  months' 
duration,  is  related  by  Alexander  Polyhistor,  the  friend 
of  Sulla.^  This  latter  reign  appears  to  have  belonged 
to  the  year  B.C.  703.  So  much  is  known  to  us  from 
the  classical  writers.  From  the  Assyrian  monuments 
we  learn  that  the  relations  between  Babylonia  and 
Assyria,  during  the  reign  of  Merodach-Baladan,  were 
hostile.  Sargon  relates  that  he  attacked  this  king, 
whom  he  viewed  as  a  rebel,  in  his  first  year,^  defeated 
his  ally,  the  king  of  Elam,  and  ravaged  his  territory, 
but  without  coming  into  contact  with  the  Babylonian 
monarch  himself  After  this,  troubles  elsewhere  forced 
him  to  leave  Merodach-Baladan  in  peace  for  eleven 
years ;  but  in  his  twelfth  year  he  again  invaded  Baby- 
lonia, took  Babylon,  and  made  Merodach-Baladan  a 
prisoner.^  Five  years  after  this,  as  we  learn  from  Sen- 
nacherib's annals,^  on  the  death  of  Sargon,  Babylonia 
revolted.  Merodach-Baladan,  escaping  from  the  cus- 
tody in  which  he  was  held,  hastened  to  Babylon,  and 
re-established  his  authority  over  the  whole  southern 
kingdom.  But  Sennacherib  at  once  marched  against 
him,  defeated  his  forces,  recovered  Babylon,  and  drove 
him  to  take  refuge  in  the  marshes  of  southern  Chaldaea; 
whence,  after  a  short  time,  he  fled  across  the  Persian 
Gulf  to  southern  Elam,  where  he  died  in  exile. 

The   embassy  of  Merodach-Baladan   to    Hezekiah 

^Ap.  Euseb.  *' Chron.  Can.,"  pars,  i.,  c.  5.  Both  reigns  are  noticed 
in  a  recently  deciphered  Babylonian  tablet.  ("  Proceedings  of  the  Society 
of  Bibl.  Archaeology"  for  1884,  pp.  197-8.) 

2  George  Smith,  "History  of  Babylonia,"  p.  1 1 6. 

3  Ibid.,  p.  123.  *Ibid.,  p.  125. 


i6  BAB  YL ON  AND  EG  YPT. 

falls,  by  Archbishop  Usher's  chronology,  which  is  here 
founded  upon  Ptolemy's  Canon,  into  the  year  B.C.  713. 
It  would  thus  have  taken  place  between  Sargon's  first 
and  second  attack,  very  shortly  before  the  latter.  The 
monuments  do  not  mention  it ;  but  they  show  that  at 
this  time  Merodach-Baladan  was  expecting  the  Assy- 
rians to  invade  his  country,  was  looking  out  for  allies, 
and  doing  his  best  to  strengthen  his  position.  Under 
these  circumstances  it  would  be  natural  that  he  should 
seek  the  alliance  of  Hezekiah,  who,  at  the  opposite  end 
of  the  Assyrian  dominions,  had  "  rebelled  against  the 
king  of  Assyria,  and  served  him  not "  (2  Kings  xviii. 
7).  That  he  should  cloak  his  design  under  the  double 
pretext  that  his  object  was  to  congratulate  the  Jewish 
king  on  his  recovery  from  a  dangerous  illness  (Isa. 
xxxix.  i),  and  to  inquire  concerning  the  astronomical 
"wonder  done  in  the  land  "  (2  Chron.  xxxii.  31),  is 
intrinsically  probable,  being  consonant  with  diplomatic 
practice  both  in  the  East  and  in  the  West.  An 
astronomical  marvel,  such  as  that  of  the  going  back 
of  the  shadow  on  the  dial  of  Ahaz  (2  Kings  xx.  1 1  ; 
Isa.  xxxviii.  8),  would  naturally  attract  attention  in 
Babylonia,  where  the  phenomena  of  the  heavens  were 
observed  with  the  utmost  diligence  from  a  very  remote 
period. 

It  must  not  be  concealed  that  there  is  one  important 
discrepancy  between  the  scriptural  narrative  and  the 
histoiy  of  Merodach-Baladan,  as  recorded  upon  the 
Assyrian  monuments.  Merodach-Baladan  is  stated, 
both  by  Isaiah  and  by  the  compiler  of  the  Book  of 


NOTICES  IN  KINGS  AND  CHRONICLES.  17 

Kings,  to  have  been  "the  son  of  Baladan  " — on  the 
monuments  he  is  always  called  "  the  son  of  Yakina/' 
or  ''  Yakin."  Mr.  George  Smith  has  suggested  that 
Yakin  was  the  name  of  the  tribe  whereto  Merodach- 
Baladan  belonged ;  ^  but  it  can  scarcely  be  argued  that 
he  was  called  "  son  of  Yakin  "  on  this  account.  Yakin 
must  have  been  a  person ;  and  if  not  the  actual  father 
of  Merodach-Baladan,  at  any  rate  one  of  his  progeni- 
tors. Perhaps  the  true  explanation  is,  that  Yakin  was 
a  more  or  less  remote  progenitor,  the  founder  of  the 
house,  and  Baladan  (Bel-iddina  ?)  the  actual  father  of 
Merodach-Baladan.  By  the  former  designation  he  was 
popularly  known,  by  the  latter  in  his  official  comn>u- 
nications. 

"  The  Lord  spake  to  Manasseh  and  to  his  people,  but  they  would  not 
hearken.  Wherefore  the  Lord  brought  upon  them  the  captains  of  the 
host  of  the  king  of  Assyria,  which  took  Manasseh  among  the  thorns, 
and  bound  him  with  fetters,  to  carry  him  to  Babylon.  And  when  he 
was  in  affliction,  he  besought  the  Lord  his  God,  and  humbled  himself 
greatly  before  the  God  of  his  fathers ;  and  he  prayed  unto  Him,  and  He 
was  intreated  of  him,  and  heard  his  supplication,  and  brought  him  again 
to  Jerusalem  into  his  kingdom." — 2  Chron.  xxxiii.  10-13. 

It  appears  by  this  passage,  i.  That  Manasseh,  after 
having  provoked  God  h\  a  long  course  of  wicked  con- 
duct, was  attacked  and  made  prisoner  by  the  generals 
of  a  king  of  Assyria,  who  "took  him  among  the 
thorns,"  or  rather  "  took  him  with  hooks,"  and  bound 
him  with  fetters,  and  so  carried  him  with  them  to 
Babylon ;    2.  That  after  having  suffered  captivity  for 

1  *•  History  of  Babylonia,"  p.  1 13. 


i8  BAB  YL  ON  AND  E G  YPT. 

a  time,  and  repented  of  his  wickedness,  he  was  allowed 
by  the  king  of  Assyria  to  quit  Babylon,  and  return  to 
Jerusalem,  where  he  was  once  more  established  in  his 
kingdom.  Three  things  are  especially  remarkable  in 
this  narrative  :  (<^)  the  generals  of  the  Assyrian  monarch 
conduct  Manasseh  to  their  master,  not  at  Nineveh,  but 
at  Babylon  ;  (b)  they  bring  him  into  the  royal  presence 
"■  with  hooks,''  and  fettei^ed ;  (r)  by  an  act  of  clemency, 
very  unusual  in  the  East,  the  Assyrian  king  pardons 
him  after  a  time,  and  goes  so  far  as  to  reinstate  him  in 
his  government.  We  have  to  consider  what  light  pro- 
fane history  throws  upon  these  facts. 

And,  first,  how  comes  a  king  of  Assyria  to  hold  his 
court  at  Babylon  ?  Nineveh  is  the  Assyrian  capital, 
and  ordinarily  the  court  is  held  there.  If  not  there,  it 
is  held  at  Dur-Sargina,  where  Sargon  built  himself  a 
palace,  or  at  Calah  (Nimrud),  where  were  the  palaces 
of  Asshur-izir-pal,  Shalmaneser  II.,  and  Tiglath-Pileser 
II.  What  has  caused  the  anomaly  of  a  transfer  of  the 
court  to  the  capital  of  another  country  ?  The  Assyrian 
records  fully  explain  this  circumstance.  Sennacherib, 
Hezekiah's  contemporary,  was  succeeded  by  his  son, 
Esar-haddon,  who  would  thus  be  Manasseh's  con- 
temporary. The  Assyrian  monuments  tell  us  that  this 
monarch  inaugurated  a  new  policy  with  respect  to 
Babylonia.  Most  Assyrian  kings  who  found  themselves 
strong  enough  to  reduce  that  country  to  subjection, 
governed  it  by  means  of  a  native  or  Assyrian  viceroy ; 
and  this  was  the  plan  adopted  by  Sennacherib,  Esar- 
haddon's  father.     But  Esar-haddon,  when  he  came  to 


NOTICES  IN  KINGS  AND  CHRONICLES.  19 

the  throne,  acted  differently.  He  assumed  the  double 
title  of  "  King  of  Assyria  and  Babylonia,"  appointed 
no  viceroy,  but,  having  built  himself  a  palace  in 
Babylon,  reigned  there  in  person,  holding  his  court 
sometimes  at  the  northern,  sometimes  at  the  southern 
capital.  Towards  the  end  of  his  life,  he  relinquished 
Nineveh  altogether  to  his  eldest  son,  Asshur-bani-pal, 
and  contented  himself  with  ruling  the  southern  king- 
dom from  his  palace  in  Babylon.^  The  anomaly  is 
thus  fully  explained,  and  what  once  appeared  a  difficulty 
turns  out  a  confirmation. 

What  our  translators  intended  to  be  understood  by 
the  expression,  "  which  took  Manasseh  among  the 
thorns,"  is  perhaps  doubtful.  But  they  convey  to  most 
minds  the  idea  of  a  caitiff  monarch  endeavouring  to 
hide  himself  from  his  pursuers  in  a  thorny  brake,  but 
detected,  and  dragged  from  his  concealment.  The 
words  in  the  orisrinal  have  no  such  meanincf.  D'nin 
(khokhini),  the  term  translated  ''  thorns,"  is  indeed 
capable  of  that  rendering ;  but  it  has  also  another 
sense,  much  more  suitable  to  the  present  context. 
Gesenius  ^  explains  it  as  "  instrumentum  ferreum, 
circulus  vel  hamus,  in  modum  spinae  aculeatae,  quo 
olim  captivi  figebantur,  et  quo  Turcae  suos  captivos 
detinent  vinctos."  In  the  singular  number  the  word 
is  translated  "  hook  "  in  Job  xli.  2  ;  and  a  term  nearly 
identical,  khdkh  has  the  same  rendering  in  2  Kings 
xix.  28  ;  Isa.  xxxvii.  29  ;  Ezek,  xxix.  4;  xxxviii.  4,  etc. 

^G.  Smith,  "History  of  Babylonia,"  pp.  141,  142. 
2 "Hebrew  Lexicon,"  advoc.  mn 


BABYLO .V  AND  EGYP T. 


These  passages  sufficiently  fix  the  meaning  of  the 
phrase  used  in  Chronicles.  The  captains  of  the  king 
of  Assyria  *'  took  Manasseh  away  with  hooks  "  (comp. 
Amos  iv.  2),  and  having  also  "  bound  him  with  fetters," 
brought  him  into  the  presence  of  Esar-haddon. 

The  practice  of  bringing  prisoners  of  importance 
into  the  presence  of  a  conquering  monarch  by  means 
of  a  thong  attached  to  a  hook  or  ring  passed  through 
their  upper  or  their  under  lip,  or  both,  is  illustrated 
by  the  sculptures  both  of  Babylonia  and  Assyria. 
Sargon  is  seen  in  his  palace  at  Khorsabad  receiving 
prisoners  whose  lips  are  thus  perforated;^  and  one  of 
the  few  Babylonian  sculptures  still  extant  shows  us  a 
vizier  conducting  into  the  presence  of  a  monarch  two 
captives  held  in  durance  in  the  same  way.^  Cruel  and 
barbarous  as  such  treatment  of  a  captured  king  seems 
to  us,  there  is  no  doubt  that  it  was  an  Assyrian  usage. 
To  put  a  hook  in  a  man's  mouth,  and  a  bridle  in  his 
jaws  (2  Kings  xix.  28),  was  no  metaphor  expressive 
of  mere  defeat  and  capture,  but  a  literal  description  of 
a  practice  that  was  common  in  the  age  and  country — 
a  practice  from  which  their  royal  rank  did  not  exempt 
even  captured  monarchs. 

The  pardon  extended  by  Esar-haddon  to  Manasseh, 
little  consonant  as  it  is  with  general  Oriental  practice, 
agrees  well  with  the  character  of  this  particular 
monarch,  whose  rule  was  remarkably  mild,  and  who 
is  proved  by  his  inscriptions  to  have  been   equally 

^See  "Ancient  Monaichies,"  vol.  i.,  pp.  243,  292  (2d  ed,). 
2  Ibid.,  vol.  iii.,  p.  7. 


NOTICES  IN  KINGS  AND  CHRONICLES.  21 

merciful  on  other  occasions.  When  a  son  of  Mero- 
dach-Baladan,  who  had  been  in  revolt  against  his 
authority,  quitted  his  refuge  in  Susiana,  and  presented 
himself  before  Esar-haddon's  footstool  at  Nineveh, 
that  monarch  received  him  favourably,  accepted  his 
homage,  and  appointed  him  to  the  government  of  a 
large  tract  upon  the  Persian  Gulf,  previously  ruled  by 
his  father,  and  afterwards  by  his  elder  brother.^ 
Again,  when  the  chief  of  the  Gambalu,  an  Aramaean 
tribe  upon  the  Euphrates,  after  revolt,  submitted  him- 
self, and  brought  the  arrears  of  his  tribute,  together 
with  a  present  of  buffaloes,  Esar-haddon  states  that  he 
forgave  him,  strengthened  his  city  with  fresh  works, 
and  continued  him  in  the  government  of  it.^ 

"  Jehoiakim  was  twenty  and  five  years  old  when  he  began  to  reign, 
and  he  reigned  eleven  years  in  Jerusalem ;  and  he  did  that  which  was 
evil  in  the  sight  of  the  Lord  his  God.  Against  him  came  up  Nebuchad- 
nezzar, king  of  Babylon,  and  bound  him  in  fetters,  to  carry  him  to  Baby- 
lon. Nebuchadnezzar  also  carried  of  the  vessels  of  the  house  of  the 
Lord  to  Babylon,  and  put  them  in  his  temple  at  Babylon." — 2  Chron. 
xxxvi.  5-7. 

With  this  notice  may  be  compared  the  following, 
which  relates  to  the  same  series  of  occurrences  : — 

"  In  the  third  year  of  the  reign  of  Jehoiakim,  king  of  Judah,  came 
Nebuchadnezzar,  king  of  Babylon  unto  Jeinisalem,  and  besieged  it.  And 
the  Lord  gave  Jehoiakim,  king  of  Judah,  into  his  hand,  with  part  of  the 
vessels  of  the  house  of  God ;  which  he  carried  into  the  land  of  Shinar 
to  the  house  of  his  god ;  and  he  brought  the  vessels  into  the  treasure 
house  of  his  god." — Dan.  i.  i,  2. 

^  "Ancient  Monarchies,"  vol.  ii.,  p.  188.  ^Ibid.,  p.  191. 


BAB  YL  ON  AND  EG  YFT. 


In  these  passages  we  have  brought  before  us,  I.  The 
independence  of  Babylon,  which,  when  last  mentioned 
(2  Chron.  xxxiii.  1 1),  was  subject  to  the  king  of 
Assyria;  2.  Its  government  by  a  prince  named  "  Neb- 
uchadnezzar," or,  as  Ezekiel  transliterates  the  word 
from  the  Babylonian,  "Nebuchadrezzar"  (Ezek.  xxvi. 
7) ;  3.  The  fact  that  this  prince  made  a  great  expedition 
into  Palestine  in  the  third  year  of  Jehoiakim,  king  of 
Judah,  besieged  Jerusalem,  and  took  it,  and  made 
Jehoiakim  a  prisoner;  4.  The  further  fact,  that  he 
carried  off  from  the  Jewish  temple  a  certain  portion  of 
the  holy  vessels,  conveyed  them  to  Babylon,  and 
placed  them  there  "  in  the  house  of  his  god." 

With  respect  to  the  first  point,  profane  history 
tells  us  by  the  mouth  of  a  large  number  of  writers,^ 
that  towards  the  close  of  the  seventh  century  b.  c. 
the  Assyrian  empire  came  to  an  end,  Nineveh  was 
destroyed,  and  Babylon  stepped  into  a  position  of 
greatly  augmented  power  and  authority.  The  exact 
date  of  the  change  is  undetermined  ;  but  it  was  cer- 
tainly not  earlier  than  B.C.  625,  and  not  later  than 
B.  c.  606.  The  third  year  of  Jehoiakim  seems  to  have 
been  b.  c.  605.  Thus  the  independence  of  Babylonia, 
distinctly  implied  in  the  above  passages,  was  beyond 
all  doubt  difait  accompli  at  the  time  mentioned. 

The  second  point — the  government  of  Babylonia 
at  this  exact  time  by  a  prince  named  Nebuchadnezzar 
or  Nebuchadrezzar — is    to   some    extent   a   difficulty. 


^  As  Herodotus  (i.  io6,  1 78),  Polyhistor,  Abydenus,  the  writer  of  the 
Book  of  Tobit  (xiv.  13),  and  others. 


NOTICES  IN  KINGS  AND  CHRONICLES.  23 

The  name  indeed  is  abundantly  confirmed.  Nine- 
tenths  of  the  baked  bricks  found  in  Babylonia  bear 
the  stamp  of  ''  Nabu-kiidurri-uztir,  the  son  of  Nabu- 
pal-uzur,  king  of  Babylon."  And  Berosus,  Abydenus, 
and  Alexander  Polyhistor,  all  give  the  name  with 
little  variation.  But  Babylonian  chronology  made 
Nebuchadnezzar  ascend  the  throne,  not  in  B.C.  605, 
but  in  B.  c.  604  ;  and  Berosus  expressly  stated  that  the 
first  expedition  conducted  by  Nebuchadnezzar  into 
Syria,  Palestine  and  the  northeastern  parts  of  Egypt, 
fell  into  the  lifetime  of  his  father,  Nabopolassar,  and 
preceded  his  own  establishment  on  the  Babylonian 
throne.^  The  difficulty  is  sometimes  met  by  the  sup- 
position that  Nebuchadnezzar  was  associated  in  the 
kingdom  by  his  father  before  setting  out  upon  his 
expedition  (and  association  was  certainly  a  practice 
not  unknown  to  the  Babylonians) ;  but  the  more 
probable  explanation  is,  that  the  sacred  writers  call 
Nebuchadnezzar  "  king  of  Babylon,"  on  first  making 
mention  of  him,  because  he  became  such;  jus^as  we 
ourselves  might  say,  "  King  George  the  Fourth  re- 
ceived the  allied  sovereigns  on  their  visit  to  England 
after  Waterloo  ; "  or,  **  The  Emperor  Louis  Napoleon 
was  long  a  prisoner  in  the  fortress  of  Ham  ; "  although 
George  the  Fourth  received  the  sovereigns  as  prince 
regent,  and  Louis  Napoleon  was  not  emperor  till 
many  years  after  his  imprisonment  was  over.^  Or,  it 
may  have  been  assumed  by  the  Jews  that  the  leader 

1  Berosus,  Fr.  14. 

2  See  Dr.  Pusey's  "  Daniel,"  p.  400. 


24  BAB  YL ON  AND  EG  YPT. 

of  the  great  expedition  was  the  king  of  the  people 
whom  he  led  against  them,  and  the  sacred  writers 
may  have  received  no  directions  to  correct  the  popular 
misapprehension. 

The  expedition  itself,  and  its  synchronism  with 
Jehoiakim's  third  year,  is  generally  allowed.  Berosus 
related,  that  in  the  last  year  of  Nabopolassar's  reign, 
which  by  the  Canon  of  Ptolemy  was  b.  c.  605,  he  sent 
his  son  Nebuchadnezzar  to  crush  a  revolt  of  the 
western  provinces.  Nebuchadnezzar  was  successful, 
conquered  Syria  and  Phoenicia,  and  had  invaded 
Egypt,  when  news  of  his  father's  death  reached  him, 
and  forced  him  to  return  to  his  own  capital. 

The  fourth  point — one  of  comparative  detail — re- 
ceives very  curious  illustration  from  the  Babylonian 
monuments.  Nebuchadnezzar  is  said  to  have  placed 
the  holy  vessels  which  he  carried  off  from  Jerusalem 
in  his  temple  at  Babylon,"  " the  house  of  his  god','  and 
to  have  "  brought  them  into  the  treasure-house  of  Ids 
godr  These  expressions  are  at  first  sight  surprising, 
considering  that  the  Babylonian  religion  was  poly- 
theistic, that  Babylon  had  many  temples,  and  that  the 
kings,  as  a  general  rule,  distributed  their  favours  impar- 
tially among  the  various  personages  of  the  pantheon. 
It  is,  however,  an  undoubted  fact  that  Nebuchadnezzar 
formed  an  exception  to  the  general  rule.  He  was  a 
devotee  of  Merodach.  He  calls  Merodach  "his  lord," 
"  his  gracious  lord,"  "  his  maker,"  "  the  god  who 
deposited  his  germs  in  his  mother's  womb,"  "  the  god 
who  created  him,  and  assigned  him  the  empire  over 


NOTICES  IN  KINGS  AND  CHRONICLES.  25 

multitudes  of  men."  One  of  the  foremost  of  his  own 
titles  is  "  Worshipper  of  Merodach."  He  regards 
Merodach  as  "  the  great  lord,"  "  the  lord  of  lords," 
"  the  chief  of  the  gods,"  "  the  king  of  heaven  and 
earth,"  "  the  god  of  gods."  Even  on  the  cylinders 
which  record  his  dedication  of  temples  to  other  deities 
it  is  Merodach  whom  he  principally  glorifies.^  Sir  H. 
Rawlinson  says :  "  The  inscriptions  of  Nebuchadnezzar 
are  for  the  most  part  occupied  with  the  praises  of 
Merodach,  and  with  prayers  for  the  continuance  of  his 
favour.  The  king  ascribes  to  him  his  elevation  to  the 
throne :  '  Merodach,  the  great  lord,  has  appointed  me 
to  the  empire  of  the  world,  and  has  confided  to  my 
care  the  far-spread  people  of  the  earth ; '  *  Merodach, 
the  great  lord,  the  senior  of  the  gods,  the  most 
ancient,  has  given  all  nations  and  people  to  my  care,' 
etc.  The  prayer  also  to  Merodach,  with  which  the 
inscriptions  of  Nebuchadnezzar  always  terminate,  in- 
vokes the  favor  of  the  god  for  the  protection  of  the 
king's  throne  and  empire,  and  for  its  continuance 
through  all  ages  to  the  end  of  time."^ 

The  temple  of  Merodach  at  Babylon  is  properly 
called  "  Nebuchadnezzar's  temple,"  because  he  com- 
pletely rebuilt  and  restored  it.  It  was  the  great  temple 
of  Babylon,  and  known  to  the  Greeks  as  the  "temple 
(or  tower)  of  Belus."  To  its  ruins  the  name  of  "  Babil " 
still  attaches.  Nebuchadnezzar  describes  his  restora- 
tion of  it  at  great  length  in  his  "  Standard  Inscrip- 

^  See  "  Records  of  the  Past,"  vol.  vii.,  pp.  71-78. 
2  Rawlinson,  "Herodotus,"  vol.  i.,  p.  652  (3d  edition). 
3 


26  BAB  YL ON  AND  EGYPT. 

tion  ;"^  and  his  statement  is  confirmed  by  the  fact  that 
all  the  inscribed  bricks  which  have  ever  been  found  in 
it  bear  his  name.  Special  mention  of  the  "  treasure- 
house  "  attached  to  the  temple  has  not  been  found  in 
the  Babylonian  remains ;  but  it  was  probably  the 
building  at  the  base  of  the  great  tower,  which  is 
described  by  Herodotus  as  a  "  second  temple,"  and 
said  to  have  contained  furniture  and  figures  in  solid 
gold,  together  with  many  other  offerings. 


2 


1  See  "  Records  of  the  Past,"  vol.  v.,  pp.  116-120. 

2  Herod.,  i.  1S3. 


CHAPTER   III. 

FURTHER    NOTICES    OF    BABYLON  IN  THE    BOOKS    OF 
KINGS    AND    CHRONICLES. 

The  numerous  expeditions  of  the  Babylonians  against 
Jerusalem,  subsequently  to  the  first  attack  in  b.  c.  605, 
receive  no  direct  confirmation  from  the  cuneiform 
monuments,  probably  owing  to  the  fact  that  no 
general  historical  inscription  descriptive  of  the  events 
of  Nebuchadnezzar's  reign  has  been  as  yet  discovered. 
The  records  of  his  tim.e  which  modern  research  has 
unearthed,  consist  almost  entirely  either  of  invocations 
addressed  to  the  gods,  or  of  descriptions  and  measure- 
ments connected  with  his  great  works.  ^  Alexander 
Polyhistor,  however,  noticed  an  expedition  of  Nebu- 
chadnezzar's into  these  parts,  which  appears  to  have 
been  that  conducted  in  the  year  b.  c.  597,  against 
Jehoiakim,  whereof  we  have  the  following  notice  in 
the  Second  Book  of  Kings : — 

^  Until  the  year  1878,  no  historical  inscription  of  Nebuchadnezzar's 
had  come  to  light.  In  that  year  a  small  and  mutilated  cylinder,  giving 
an  account  of  some  events  belonging  to  his  thirty-seventh  year,  was 
purchased  by  the  British  Museum.  Further  reference  will  be  made  to 
this  cylinder  in  a  future  chapter. 

27 


28  BABYLON  AND  EG YPT. 

"  The  Lord  sent  against  him "  (/,  e.  Jehoiakim)  "  bands  of  the 
Chaldees,  and  bands  of  the  Syrians,  and  bands  of  the  Moabites,  and 
bands  of  the  children  of  Animon,  and  sent  them  against  Judah  to 
destroy  it,  according  to  the  word  of  the  Lord,  which  He  spake  by  His 
servants  the  prophets." — 2.  Kings  xxiv.  2. 

Polyhistor  tells  us^  that  the  expedition  was  one  in 
which  Nebuchadnezzar  called  in  the  aid  of  his  allies, 
among  others,  of  the  Median  king  called  by  him 
Astibaras,  who  seems  to  represent  Cyaxares.  The 
number  of  troops  employed  was  unusually  great, 
amounting,  according  to  the  same  authority,  to  ten 
thousand  chariots,  one  hundred  and  twenty  thousand 
horsemen,  and  one  hundred  and  eighty  thousand 
infantry.  These  numbers  imply  an  army  gathered 
from  many  nations,  and  account  for  the  expressions, 
"  bands  of  the  Chaldees,  and  bands  of  the  Syrians, 
and  bands  of  the  Moabites,  and  bands  of  the  children 
of  Ammon,"  in  the  passage  of  Kings,  as  well  as  for 
the  following  in  Ezekiel : — 

"  Then  the  nations  set  against  him  on  eveiy  side  from  the  provinces, 
and  spread  their  net  over  him  :  he  was  taken  in  their  pit." — Ezek. 
xix.  8. 

The  context  of  this  passage  shows  that  the  monarch 
intended  is  Jehoiakim. 

On  passing  from  the  reign  of  Jehoiakim  to  that  of 
Jehoiachin,  the  author  of  Kings  makes  the  following 
remark : — 

"  And  the  king  of  Egypt  came  not  again  any  more  out  of  his  land  ; 
for  the  king  of  Babylon  had  taken  from  the  river  of  Egypt  unto  the 

^  Fragm.  Hist.  Gr.,  vol.  iii,,  p.  229,  Fr.  24. 


NOTICES  IN  KINGS  AND  CHRONICLES.  29 

river  Euphrates  all  that  pertained  to  the  king  of  Egypt." — 2  Kings 
xxiv.  7. 

This  remark,  though  interposed  at  this  point,  belongs, 
so  far  as  it  bears  on  Babylon,  to  an  anterior  time. 
The  king  of  Egypt,  the  writer  intends  to  say,  did  not 
at  this  time  lend  any  help  to  Jehoiakim  against  Nebu- 
chadnezzar, did  not  even  set  foot  beyond  his  borders, 
because  some  years  previously  the  Egyptians  had  been 
worsted  in  an  encounter  with  the  Babylonians,  and  had 
lost  to  them  the  whole  of  their  Asiatic  dominions — 
the  entire  tract  between  the  torrent  {nakhal)  of  Egypt, 
or  the  Wady  el  Arish,  and  the  Euphrates.  The  event 
glanced  at  is  among  the  most  important  in  the  history 
of  the  East.  When  Necho,  king  of  Egypt,  in  b.  c. 
608,  carried  the  Egyptian  arms  triumphantly  from  the 
Nile  valley  to  the  Upper  Euphrates,  it  seemed  as  if  the 
old  glories  of  the  Thothmeses  and  Amenhoteps 
were  about  to  be  renewed,  as  if  Egypt  was  about  to 
become  once  more  the  dominant  power  in  western 
Asia,  and  to  throw  the  hordes  of  Asiatic  invaders  back 
upon  their  own  continent.  A  permanent  advance  of 
Egypt,  and  retrocession  of  Babylon,  at  this  time 
would  greatly  have  complicated  the  political  problem, 
and  might  seriously  have  checked  that  aggressive 
spirit  which  was  already  moving  Asia  to  attempt  the 
conquest  of  Europe.  When  Nabopolassar,  therefore, 
in  the  last  year  of  his  reign,  sent  his  son  Nebuchad- 
nezzar to  challenge  Necho  to  a  trial  of  strength,  and 
the  hosts  of  Africa  and  Asia  met  in  battle  array  at 
the  great  frontier  fortress  of  Carchemish  (Jer.  xlvi. 
3* 


30  BAB YL ON  AND  EGYPT. 

2),  the  issue  raised  was  of  no  small  importance,  being 
nothing  less  than  the  question  whether  African  power 
and  influence  should  or  should  not  maintain  itself  in 
Syria  and  the  adjoining  regions,  should  or  should  not 
establish  its  superiority  over  the  power  of  Asia,  should 
or  should  not  step  into  a  position  which  would  have 
brought  it  shortly  into  direct  contact  with  the  civiliza- 
tion of  the  Greeks.  The  battle  of  Carchemish,  as  it 
is  called,  decided  these  questions.  The  armies  of 
Nebuchadnezzar  and  Pharaoh- Necho  met  in  the 
vicinity  of  Carchemish  (now  Jerablus),  in  the  fourth 
year  of  Jehoiakim,  king  of  Judah,  which  was  the 
accession  year  of  Nebuchadnezzar,  and  contended  in 
a  great  battle,  wherein  ultimately  the  Babylonians 
were  victorious.  The  battle  is  prophetically,  but  very 
graphically,  described  by  the  prophet  Jeremiah  : — 

"  Order  ye  the  buckler  and  shield,  and  draw  near  to  battle,"  he  says  ; 
"  harness  the  horses,  and  get  up,  ye  horsemen"  (or  rather,  "mount,  ye 
chariotmen  "),  "  and  stand  forth  with  your  helmets  ;  furbish  the  spears ; 
put  on  the  brigandines.  Wherefore  have  I  seen  them  dismayed  and 
turned  away  back  ?  Their  mighty  men  are  beaten  down,  and  are  fled 
apace,  and  look  not  back  ;  for  fear  was  round  about,  saith  the  Lord. 
Ixt  not  the  swift  flee  away,  nor  the  mighty  man  escape ;  they  shall 
stumble  and  fall  toward  the  north  by  the  river  Euphrates.  Who  is 
this  that  Cometh  up  as  a  flood,  whose  waters  toss  to  and  fro  as 
the  rivers  ?  Egypt  riseth  up  like  a  flood,  and  his  waters  are  tossed  to 
and  fro  like  the  rivers ;  and  he  saith,  I  will  go  up,  and  will  cover  the 
earth ;  I  will  destroy  the  city  and  the  inhabitants  thereof..  Come  up, 
ye  horses ;  and  rage,  ye  chariots  ;  and  let  the  mighty  men  come  forth, 
Cush  and  Phut  that  handle  the  shield,  and  Lud  that  handle  and  bend 
the  bow.  For  this  is  the  day  of  the  Lord  God  of  hosts,  a  day  of 
vengeance,  that  He  may  avenge  Him  of  His   adversaries ;    and  the 


NOTICES  IN  KINGS  AND  CHRONICLES.  31 

sword  shall  devour,  and  it  shall  be  satiate  and  made  drunk  with  their 
blood ;  for  the  Lord  God  of  hosts  hath  a  sacrifice  in  the  north  country 
by  the  river  Euphrates.  Go  up  into  Gilead,  and  take  balm,  O  virgin, 
the  daughter  of  Egypt :  in  vain  shalt  thou  use  many  medicines  ;  for 
thou  shalt  not  be  cured.  The  nations  have  heard  of  thy  shame,  and 
thy  ciy  hath  filled  the  land :  for  the  mighty  man  hath  stumbled  against 
the  mighty,  and  they  are  fallen  both  together." — Jer.  xlvi,  3-12. 

A  fierce  struggle  is  here  indicated,  a  hardly  con- 
tested battle,  terminating  in  a  complete  defeat.  Egypt 
is  not  surprised — not  taken  at  disadvantage.  She  has 
ample  time  to  call  together  her  armed  force  of  natives 
and  auxiliaries,  Cush  and  Phut  and  Lud.  Her 
chariots  are  marshalled  in  their  gallant  array,  together 
with  her  horsemen  and  her  footmen  :  she  "  rises  up 
like  a  flood,"  bent  on  conquest  rather  than  on  mere 
resistance.  But  all  is  in  vain.  "  It  is  the  day  of  the 
Lord  God  of  hosts,  a  day  of  vengeance."  By  the  river 
Euphrates  the  mighty  men  stumble  and  fall — they  are 
dismayed  and  beaten  down  ;  in  a  short  time  they  are 
compelled  to  fly — they  "  flee  apace,  and  look  not 
back."  The  mighty  man  hath  met  a  mightier ;  the 
forces  of  Asia  have  proved  too  strong  for  those  of 
Africa ;  the  Nile  flood  is  swept  back  on  its  own  land. 

Profane  history,  while  touching  the  struggle  itself 
only  in  a  single  sentence,^  amply  signalizes  the  result. 
With  the  battle  of  Carchemish,  Babylon,  for  long  ages 
oppressed  and  held  in  subjection,  springs  up  to  notice 
as  an  empire.  Syria,  Phoenicia,  Palestine,  hitherto 
threatened  alternately  by  Egypt  and  Assyria,  now  find 
a  new  foe  in  the  great  city  on  the  lower  Euphrates, 

^  Beros.  ap.  Joseph.,  Contr.  Ap.  i.  19,  \  2. 


32  BAB  YLON  AND  EG  YPT. 

and  become  fiefs  of  the  Babylonian  crown.  Egypt's 
attempt  to  recover,  under  the  Psamatiks,  the  Asiatic 
dominion  which  had  been  hers  under  the  Thothmeses 
and  Amenhoteps,  is  rudely  checked.  Her  own  terri- 
tory is  invaded,  and  she  becomes  for  a  time  a  "  base 
kingdom,"  the  subject-ally  and  tributary  of  another. 
Babylon  is  recognized  as  one  of  the  "great  powers" 
of  Asia,  sends  her  armies  within  the  Cilician  gates, 
wastes  Tyre,  destroys  Jerusalem,  makes  alliances  with 
Media  and  Lydia.  The  general  position  of  affairs  in 
Western  Asia  for  the  next  sixty  years  was  determined 
by  the  events  of  that  campaign,  wherein  "  the  king  of 
Babylon  took  from  the  river  of  Egypt  unto  the  river 
Euphrates  all  that  pertained  unto  the  king  of  Egypt." 

"  They  burnt  the  house  of  God,  and  brake  down  the  wall  of  Jerusa- 
lem, and  burnt  all  the  palaces  thereof  with  fire,  and  destroyed  all  the 
goodly  vessels  thereof:  and  them  that  had  escaped  from  the  sword 
caiTied  he  away  to  Babylon,  where  they  weie  servants  to  him  and  his 
sons,  until  the  reign  of  the  kingdom  of  Persia." — 2  Chron.  xxxvi. 
19,  20. 

The  complete  destruction  of  Jerusalem,  and  trans- 
fer of  its  inhabitants  from  Palestine  to  Babylonia, 
momentous  events  as  they  were  in  the  history  of  the 
Jewish  nation,  and  in  that  discipline  of  severity  which 
was  to  purge  out  its  dross  from  the  people  of  God, 
and  fit  them  to  hold  up  the  torch  of  truth  to  the 
nations  for  another  half  millennium,  did  not  greatly 
attract  the  attention  of  the  world  at  large,  or  even 
obtain  record  generally  at  the  hands  of  the  historio- 
graphers who  were  engaged  in  chronicling  the  events 


NOTICES  IN  KINGS  AND  CHRONICLES.  33 

of  the  time.  In  Babylon,  indeed,  it  must  have  been 
otherwise.  There,  if  nowhere  else,  the  final  capture 
and  ruin  of  so  great,  so  renowned,  so  ancient  a  city, 
after  a  siege  which  lasted  eighteen  months,  must 
beyond  a  doubt  have  been  entered  upon  the  records, 
with  the  view  of  its  being  handed  down  to  posterity. 
But,  unfortunately,  it  happens  that  at  present,  as 
already  observed,  Nebuchadnezzar's  historical  inscrip- 
tions remain  undiscovered ;  and  consequently  we  are 
still  deprived  of  such  light  as  a  Babylonian  account  of 
the  capture  of  Jerusalem  would  naturally  have  thrown 
on  the  whole  subject.  The  fragments  of  Berosus 
might  have  been  expected  to  supply  the  deficiency ; 
but,  at  the  best,  they  are  scanty,  and  for  the  time  of 
Nebuchadnezzar  they  furnish  nothing  but  a  bare  out- 
line. They  do  just  state  that  Nebuchadnezzar  made 
an  expedition  into  Palestine  and  Egypt,  carried  all 
before  him,  and,  after  burning  the  temple  at  Jerusa- 
lem, bore  away  into  captivity  the  whole  Jewish  people, 
and  settled  them  in  different  places  in  Babylonia; 
but  they  give  no  further  particulars.  Not  even  is  the 
name  of  the  Jewish  king  mentioned,  nor  that  of  the 
general  to  whom  Nebuchadnezzar  entrusted  the  exe- 
cution of  his  orders  for  the  destruction  of  the  city. 

Direct  illustration  of  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem, 
and  captivity  of  the  Jewish  people,  is  therefore  at 
present  impossible.  Still  history  may  be  said  to 
illustrate  indirectly  this  portion  of  the  sacred  records 
by  the  examples  which  it  sets  forth  of  parallel  instances. 
The    complete    destruction   of   a   great   city   by   the 


34  BAB YL ON  AND  EGYPT. 

powers  which  conquer  it  is  a  rare  event,  requiring  as 
it  does  a  dogged  determination  on  the  part  of  the 
conqueror,  and  a  postponement  of  immediate  gain  to 
prospective  advantage.  But  the  complete  destruction 
of  Nineveh,  which  is  abundantly  attested,  had  taken 
place  not  very  long  before,  and  must  have  been  fresh 
in  the  minds  of  men  at  the  time,  furnishing  a  prece- 
dent for  such  extreme  severity,  while  a  sufficient 
motive  may  be  discerned  in  the  important  position  of 
Jerusalem,  and  the  persistency  of  the  rebellious  spirit 
in  its  inhabitants. 

Transplantations  of  conquered  nations  are  unknown 
in  modern  warfare,  and  scarcely  belong  to  the  history 
of  the  West.  But  in  the  East  they  were  common 
anciently,  and  are  still  not  wholly  unknown.  The 
Kurds,  who  protect  the  northeastern  frontier  of  Persia 
against  the  raids  of  the  Turkomans,  were  transported 
thither  by  Nadir  Shah,  after  a  revolt  in  Kurdistan, 
being  thus  transferred  from  the  extreme  west  almost 
to  the  extreme  east  of  his  empire.  Sargon  trans- 
ported the  Samaritans  to  Gozan  and  Media;  Senna- 
cherib carried  off  200,000  Jews  from  Judaea;  Esar- 
haddon  placed  Elamites,  Susianians  and  Babylonians 
in  Samaria.  Darius  Hystaspis  brought  the  nation  of 
the  Paeonians  from  Europe  into  Asia  Minor,'^  removed 
the  Barcaeans  to  Bactria^  and  the  Eretrians  to  Arde- 
ricca,  near  Susa.^  The  forcible  removal  of  large 
populations  from  their  native  countries  to  a  remote 
region  was  a  portion  of  the  system  under  which  great 

*  Herod.,  v.  17.  2  ibid.,  iv.  204.  ^  Ibid.,  vi.  119. 


NOTICES  IN  KINGS  AND  CHRONICLES.  35 

empires  were  administered  in  the  oriental  world  from 
the  time  of  Sargon  downwards,  and  was  regarded  as 
especially  suited  for  the  case  where  a  race  distin- 
guished itself  by  persistence  in  revolt. 

"  It  came  to  pass  in  the  seven  and  thirtieth  year  of  the  captivity  of 
Jchoiachin,  king  of  Judah,  in  the  twelfth  month,  on  the  seven  and 
twentieth  day  of  the  month,  that  Evil-Merodach,  king  of  Babylon,  in 
the  year  that  he  began  to  reign,  did  lift  up  the  head  of  Jehoiachin,  king 
of  Judah,  out  of  prison ;  and  he  spake  kindly  to  him,  and  set  his  throne 
above  the  thrones  of  the  kings  that  were  with  him  in  Babylon;  and 
changed  his  prison  garments :  and  he  did  eat  bread  continually  before 
him  all  the  days  of  his  life." — 2  Kings  xxv.  27-29. 

Evil-Merodach  was  mentioned  as  the  son  and  suc- 
cessor of  Nebuchadnezzar  by  Berosus  and  Abydenus. 
His  name  has  also  been  found  on  no  fewer  than  eleven 
Babylonian  contract  tablets,  and  is  transliterated  by 
the  best  authorities,  *'  Avil-Marduk."  There  can  be 
no  doubt  of  the  position  of  this  king  in  the  Babylo- 
nian list  between  Nebuchadnezzar  and  Neriglissar,  or 
Nergal-sar-uzur.  As  Jehoiachin  was  carried  captive  to 
Babylon  by  Nebuchadnezzar  in  the  eighth  year  of  his 
reign  (2  Kings  xxiv.  12),  and  Nebuchadnezzar  reigned 
forty-three  years,  according  to  Berosus,  Ptolemy,  and 
the  tablets — commencing  his  reign  in  B.C.  605,  and 
ending  it  in  B.C.  562 — the  "seven  and  thirtieth  year 
of  the  captivity  of  Jehoiachin  "  would  exactly  coincide 
with  the  first  regnal  year  of  Evil-Merodach,  which 
was  B.C.  561. 

The  mild  treatment  of  a  rebel,  whom  Nebuchad- 
nezzar had  kept  in   durance  for  so  many  years,  was 


36  BAB  YL  ON  AND  EGYPT. 

perhaps  regarded  by  the  Babylonians  as  a  wrongful 
departure  from  their  customs.  At  any  rate,  we  learn 
from  Berosiis  that  within  two  years  of  his  accession 
Evil-Merodach  was  put  to  death  by  his  subjects,  on 
the  charge  of  ruling  in  a  laivlcss  and  intemperate 
fashion.  As  Jehoiachin  "  did  eat  bread  continually 
before  Evil-Merodach  all  the  days  of  his  (i.e.  Jehoia- 
chin's)  life,"  we  must  suppose  that  he  died  within  less 
than  two  years  from  his  release.  He  would  have  been 
at  the  time  between  fifty  and  sixty  years  of  age. 

"  Those  that  had  escaped  from  the  sword  canied  he"  {i.e.  Nebu- 
chadnezzar) "  away  to  Babylon,  where  they  were  servants  to  him  and  his 
sons  until  the  reign  of  the  kingdom  of  Persia ;  to  fulfil  the  woi'd  of  the 
Lord  by  the  mouth  of  Jeremiah,  until  the  land  had  enjoyed  her  sab- 
baths ;  for  as  long  as  she  lay  desolate  she  kept  sabbath,  to  fulfil  t/ure- 
score  and  ten  years r — 2  Chron.  xxxvi.  20,  21. 

The  statement  that  the  Israelites  "  were  servants  to 
Nebuchadnezzar  and  Ids  sons  "  is  at  first  sight  contra- 
dictory to  the  Babylonian  history,  as  delivered  to  us 
by  profane  authors.  According  to  them,  Nebuchad- 
nezzar was  succeeded  by  one  son  only,  viz.,  Evil- 
Merodach,  after  whom  the  crown  fell  to  a  certain 
Neriglissar,  or  Nergal-sar-uzur,  who  was  not  a  blood 
relation.  Neriglissar,  however,  had  married  a  daughter 
of  Nebuchadnezzar,  and  having  thus  become  a  son-in- 
law,  may  conceivably  be  termed  a  "  son."  He  was 
succeeded  by  his  own  son,  Laborosoarchod,  probably  a 
grandson  of  Nebuchadnezzar,  who  would  come  under 
the  term  '*  son  "  by  the  ordinary  Hebrew  usage.  The 
successor  of  Laborosoarchod  was,  we  are  told,  "  in  no 


NOTICES  IN  KINGS  AND  CHRONICLES.  37 

way  related"  to  the  family  of  Nebuchadnezzar.  There 
are  some  reasons,  however,  for  believing  that  he,  too, 
married  a  daughter  of  the  great  monarch ;  so  that  he, 
too,  may  have  been  regarded  as  "  a  son  "  in  the  same 
sense  with  Npriglissar. 

The  seventy  years  of  the  captivity,  during  which  the 
land  lay  waste,  and  *'  enjoyed  its  sabbaths,"  may  be 
counted  from  different  dates.  In  this  place  the  year 
of  the  final  destruction  of  Jerusalem  seems  to  be  taken 
as  the  tenniiuis  a  quo.  This  was  B.C.  586,  the  nine- 
teenth year  of  Nebuchadnezzar  (2  Kings  xxv.  3-8  ; 
Jer.  lii.  6-12),  and  the  passage  would  therefore  seem 
to  point  to  B.C.  516  as  the  termination  of  the  captivity 
period.  Now  B.C.  516,  the  sixth  of  Darius  Hystaspis, 
was,  in  fact,  the  close  of  the  period  of  depression  and 
desolation,  so  far  as  the  temple  was  concerned  (Ezra 
vi.  15).  But  the  personal  captivity,  the  desolation 
of  the  land  through  loss  of  inhabitants,  both  began 
and  ended  earlier.  Jeremiah  evidently  intended  his 
"  seventy  years  "  to  count  from  the  first  capture  of 
Jerusalem  by  Nebuchadnezzar  (Jer.  xxv.  1-12),  which 
was  in  B.C.  605  ;  and  Daniel  must  have  counted  from 
the  same  date  when  he  felt,  in  B.C.  538,  that  the  time 
of  release  was  approaching  (Dan.  ix.  2).  It  is  ques- 
tionable, however,  whether  the  full  term  of  the  pro- 
phetic announcement,  thus  understood,  was  actually 
reached.  If  Nebuchadnezzar  carried  away  his  first 
captives  from  Jerusalem  in  B.C.  605,  and  Cyrus  issued 
his  edict  for  the  return  in  his  first  year  (2  Chron. 
xxxvi.  22;  Ezra,  i.  i),  which  was  b. c.  538,  the  seven- 
4 


38  BAB  YLON  AND  EG  YPT. 

tieth  year  had  certainly  not  then  commenced.  Even 
if  the  captives  did  not  take  immediate  advantage  of 
the  edict,  but  made  the  journey  from  Babylonia  to 
Palestine  in  the  year  following  the  proclamation,  b.  c. 
537,  which  is  not  improbable,  still  the  captivity  had 
not  endured  seventy  years,  but  only  sixty-eight.  It  is 
usual  to  meet  the  difficulty  by  the  supposition  that 
the  first  year  of  Cyrus  in  Scriphire  is  really  the  third 
year  from  his  conquest  of  Babylon,  Darius  the  Mede 
having  been  made  viceroy  of  Babylon  under  Cyrus 
during  the  first  two  years  after  the  conquest.  This 
is,  no  doubt,  a  possible  explanation.  But  it  is  perhaps 
as  probable  that  the  round  number  "seventy,"  in  the 
prophecy  of  Jeremiah,  was  not  intended  to  be  exact, 
but  approximate,  and  that  the  actual  duration  of  the 
captivity  fell  short  by  a  year  or  two  of  the  threatened 
period. 

That  "  the  reign  of  the  kingdom  of  Persia  "  imme- 
diately succeeded  to  that  of  Babylon,  which  was 
swallowed  up  by  the  great  Aryan  power  within  seventy 
years  of  the  accession  of  Nebuchadnezzar,  is  declared 
with  one  voice  by  the  classical  historians,  and  has  been 
recently  confirmed  by  more  than  one  native  document. 
Two  inscriptions,  brought  from  Babylonia  within  the 
last  decade,  describe  the  circumstances  under  which 
the  great  empire  of  Babylon  collapsed  before  the 
arms  of  Cyrus  the  Great,  and  was  absorbed  into  his 
dominions.  The  details  of  the  subjection  will  have  to 
be  considered  hereafter,  when  we  comment  on  those 
passages  of  Scripture  which  treat  directly  of  the  fall  of 


NOTICES  IN  KINGS  AND  CHRONICLES.  39 

the  city.  At  present  we  desire  simply  to  note  the  con- 
firmation by  the  monuments  of  the  Persian  conquest, 
effected  by  Cyrus  the  Great,  in  the  seventeenth  year 
of  Nabonidus,  which  was  the  sixty-eighth  year  after 
the  accession  of  Nebuchadnezzar  and  his  first  capture 
of  Jerusalem/ 

^  See  the  Transactions  of  the  Society  of  Biblical  Archeology,  vol.  vi., 
pp.  47-61. 


CHAPTER  IV. 

NOTICES    OF    BABYLON    IN    DANIEL. 

The  history  of  the  chosen  people  during  the  period  of 
the  Babylonian  captivity  is  carried  on  in  a  book  which 
we  are  accustomed  to  regard  as  prophetical,  but  in 
which  the  historical  element  decidedly  preponderates. 
The  first  six  chapters  of  Daniel  contain  a  continuous 
and  most  important  narrative.  The  scene  of  the 
history  has  been  transferred  from  Jerusalem  to  Baby- 
lon. We  are  introduced  into  the  court  of  the  great 
King  Nebuchadnezzar,  and  shown  his  grandeur,  his 
pride,  his  cruelty,  his  relentings,  his  self-glorification, 
his  punishment.  We  find  the  Jews  his  captives, 
scattered  in  various  parts  of  his  territories  (ch.  ix.  7), 
without  organization  or  national  life,  a  mere  herd  of 
slaves,  down-trodden  and  oppressed  for  the  most  part. 
At  the  court,  however,  it  is  different.  There  four 
Jews,  of  royal,  or  at  any  rate  noble  blood,  occupy  a 
position  of  some  importance,  take  rank  among  the 
courtiers,  hold  communication  with  the  monarch,  and 
are  called  upon  to  advise  him  in  circumstances  of 
difficulty  (ch.  i.  17-20).  After  a  time  they  rise  still 
higher  in  the  king's  favour,  and  are  promoted  to  some 
40 


NOTICES  IN  DANIEL.  41 

of  the  chief  governmental  offices  in  the  kingdom  (ch. 
ii.  48,  49).  One,  the  writer  of  great  part  of  the  book, 
if  not  even  of  the  whole,  becomes  the  very  first  person 
in  the  kingdom  next  to  the  king,  and  lives  and  prospers 
under  four  monarchs,  called  respectively,  Nebuchad- 
nezzar, Belshazzar,  Cyrus,  and  Darius.  We  have  thus 
a  considerable  body  of  Babylonian  history  in  this 
(so-called)  prophetical  book ;  and  numerous  points 
present  themselves  on  which  some  illustration  of  the 
history  from  profane  sources  is  possible. 

Let  us  take,  first,  the  character  of  Nebuchadnezzar's 
court.  It  is  vast  and  complicated,  elaborate  in  its 
organization,  careful  in  its  etiquette,  magnificent  in  its 
ceremonial.  Among  the  most  important  personages 
in  it  are  a  class  who  profess  to  have  the  power  of 
expounding  dreams,  and  generally  foretelling  future 
events  by  means  of  magic,  sorcery,  and  astrology  (ch. 
ii.  2,  10,  27,  etc.).  Next  to  these  are  the  civil  admin- 
istrators, "  princes,  governors,  captains,  judges,  treas- 
urers, councillors,  sheriffs,  and  rulers  of  provinces  " 
(ch.  iii.  2),  who  are  specially  summoned  to  attend  in 
full  numbers  on  certain  grand  occasions.  The  king  is 
waited  on  by  eunuchs,  sometimes  of  royal  descent,  who 
are  subjected  to  a  three  years'  careful  training,  and 
are  under  the  superintendence  of  a  ''master  of  the 
eunuchs,"  who  is  an  officer  of  high  position  (ch.  i.  3-5). 
The  monarch  has,  of  course,  a  "  body-guard,"  which  is 
under  the  command  of  a  "  captain  "  (ch.  ii.  14),  another 
high  official.  Music  is  used  at  the  court  in  ceremo- 
nials, and  is  apparently  of  an  advanced  kind,  the  bands 
4* 


42  BAB  YLON  AND  EG  YP T. 

comprising  performers  on  at  least  six  different  musical 
instruments  (ch.  iii.  5,  7,  10,  etc.). 

The  Babylonian  and  Assyrian  remains  amply  illus- 
trate most  of  these  particulars.  Magic  holds  a  most 
important  place  in  both  nations,  and  the  monarchs 
set  a  special  value  on  it.  Their  libraries  contained 
hundreds  of  tablets,  copied  with  the  utmost  care,  on 
which  were  recorded  the  exorcisms,  the  charms,  the 
talismans  and  the  astronomical  prognostics,  which  had 
come  down  from  a  remote  antiquity,  and  which  were 
implicitly  believed  in.  The  celestial  phenomena  were 
constantly  observed,  and  reports  sent  to  the  court  from 
the  observatories,  which  formed  the  groundwork  of 
confident  predictions.^  Eclipses  were  especially  noted, 
and,  according  to  the  month  and  day  of  their  occur- 
rence, were  regarded  as  portending  events,  political, 
social,  or  meteorological.^  We  give  a  specimen  from 
an  astronomical  calendar  : — 

"  In  the  month  of  Ekil  (August),  the  14th  day,  an  eclipse  happens; 
in  the  north  it  begins,  and  in  the  south  and  east  it  ends ;  in  the  evening 
watch  it  begins,  and  in  the  night  watch  it  ends.  To  the  king  of  Mul- 
lias  a  crown  is  given.  ,  .  .  There  are  rains  in  heaven,  and  in  the 
channels  of  the  rivers  floods.  A  famine  is  in  the  country,  and  men  sell 
their  sons  for  silver. 

"An  eclipse  happens  on  the  15th  day.  The  king's  son  murders  his 
father,  and  seizes  on  the  throne.  The  enemy  plunders  and  devours  the 
land. 

"An  eclipse  happens  on  the  i6th  day.  The  king  of  the  Hittites 
plunders  the  land,  and  on  the  throne  seizes.  There  is  rain  in  heaven, 
and  a  flood  descends  in  the  channels  of  the  rivers. 

1 "  Records  of  the  Past,"  vol.  i.,  pp.  153-157- 
2  Ibid.,  pp.  158-161. 


NOTICES  IN  DANIEL.  43 

"  An  eclipse  happens  on  the  20th  day.  There  are  rains  in  heaven, 
and  floods  in  the  rivers.  Country  makes  peace  with  country,  and  keeps 
festival. 

"  An  eclipse  happens  on  the  21st  day.  The  enemy's  throne  does  not 
endure.  A  self-appointed  king  rules  in  the  land.  After  a  year  the  Air 
god  causes  an  inundation.  After  a  year  the  king  does  not  remain.  His 
country  is  made  small."  ^ 

The  application  of  the  ethnic  term  "  Chaldaean " 
(Kasdim)  to  the  learned  caste,  or  class,  which  occupied 
itself  with  the  subjects  of  magic  and  astrology,  so 
frequent  in  Daniel  (ch.  ii.  2,  4,  5,  10;  v.  11),  is  found 
also  in  profane  writers,  as  Strabo,  Diodorus,  Cicero, 
and  others,^  who  distinguish  between  Chaldseans  and 
Babylonians,  making  the  latter  term  the  ethnic  appel- 
lative of  the  nation  at  large,  while  they  reserve  the 
former  for  a  small  section  of  the  nation,  distinguished 
by  the  possession  of  abstruse  and  recondite  learning. 
The  distinction  seems  to  have  originated  in  the  later 
period  of  the  empire,  and  to  have  been  grounded  on 
an  identification  of  the  Chaldaeans  with  the  Akkad, 
and  on  the  fact  that  the  old  Akkadian  language  and 
learning  was  in  the  later  times  the  special  possession 
of  a  literary  class,  who  furnished  to  the  nation  its 
priests,  astrologers,  magicians,  and  men  of  science. 
What  the  real  connection  was  between  the  Chaldaeans 
and  the  Akkad  is  still  uncertain  ;  but  some  ethnic 
affinity  may  be  regarded  as  probable. 

1"  Records  of  the  Past,"  vol.  i.,  p.  160. 

2  Diod.  Sic.  ii.  29;  Strab.  xvi.  i,  ^  6;  Cic.  De  Div.  i.  I,  ^  2;  42, 
\  93;  Plin.  H.  N.  vi.  30,  I  123,  etc. 


44  BAB  YL  ON  AND  E  G  YPT. 

The  division  of  the  learned  class  into  three  distinct 
bodies,  devoted  to  different  branches  of  the  mystic  lore 
in  which  all  participated,  receives  illustration  from  the 
native  remains,  where  the  literature  of  magic  comes 
under  three  principal  heads:  (i).  Written  charms  or 
talismans,  which  were  to  be  placed  on  the  bodies  of 
sick  persons,  or  on  the  doorposts  of  afflicted  houses;^ 
(2).  Formulae  of  incantation,  which  had  to  be  recited 
by  the  learned  man  in  order  to  produce  their  proper 
effect;^  and  (3).  Records  of  observations,  intended  to 
serve  as  grounds  for  the  prediction  of  particular  events, 
together  with  collections  of  prognostics  from  eclipses 
or  other  celestial  phenomena,  regarded  as  having  a 
general  applicability.^  The  preparation  of  the  written 
charms  or  talismans  was  probably  the  special  task  of 
the  "  magicians "  or  kJicrttnniniin,  whose  name  is 
formed  from  the  root  khcrct,  which  signifies  "  an 
engraving  tool,"  or  "  stylus."  The  composition  and 
recitation  of  the  formulae  of  incantation  belonged  to 
the  aslisJiaplihn  or  mccasJiapliim,  the  "  astrologers " 
and  "  sorcerers "  of  our  version,  whose  names  are 
derived  from  the  root  ashaph  or  cashapJi,  which  means 
"  to  mutter."  ^  The  taking  of  observations  and  framing 
of  tables  of  prognostics  is  probably  to  be  assigned  to 
the  gdzeriin  or  "  dividers,"  in  our  version  "  sooth- 
sayers "  who  divided  the  heavens  into  constellations 

^See  "Records  of  the  Past,"  vol.  iii.,  p.  142. 
2  Ibid.,  vol.  iii.,  pp.  147-152,  and  xi.,  128-138. 
'Ibid.,  vol.  i.,  pp.  153-163. 
*Furst,  "Concordant.,"  p.  133. 


NOTICES  IN  DANIEL.  45 

or  "  houses "   for  astronomical  and   astrological   pur- 
poses/ 

The  attention  paid  to  dreams  (ch.  ii.  1-46;  iv.  5-27) 
by  the  Babylonian  monarch  is  quite  in  accordance 
with  what  we  know  of  the  state  of  opinion,  both  in 
Babylonia  and  Assyria,  about  the  time  of  Nebuchad- 
nezzar. The  Assyrians  had  a  ''  dream  deity,"  whom 
they  called  Makhir,  and  regarded  as  "  the  daughter  of 
the  Sun,"  and  to  whom  they  were  in  the  habit  of 
praying,  either  beforehand,  to  send  them  favourable 
dreams,  or  after  they  had  dreamed,  to  "confirm"  their 
dream,  or  make  it  turn  out  favourably  to  them.^  A 
late  Assyrian  monarch  records  that,  in  the  course  of  a 
war  which  he  carried  on  with  Elam  or  Susiana,  one 
of  his  "  wise  men"  dreamed  a  remarkable  dream,  and 
forthwith  communicated  to  him  the  particulars. 
"  Ishtar,"  he  said,  "  the  goddess  of  war  had  appeared 
to  him  in  the  dead  of  night,  begirt  with  flames  on  the 
right  hand  and  on  the  left;  she  held  a  bow  in  her 
hand,  and  was  riding  in  a  chariot,  as  if  going  forth  to 
war.  Before  her  stood  the  king,  whom  she  addressed 
as  a  mother  would  her  child.  .  .  .  '  Take  this  bow,'  she 
said,  *  and  go  with  it  to  the  battle.  Wherever  thou 
shalt  pitch  thy  camp,  I  will  come  to  thee.'  Then 
the  king  replied,  -  *  O  queen  of  all  the  goddesses, 
wherever  thou  goest,  let  me  accompany  thee.'  She 
made  answer,  '  I  will  protect  thee,  and  march  with 
thee  at  the  time  of  the  feast  of  Nebo.     Meanwhile, 

^  "Ancient  Monarchies,"  vol.  ii.,  p.  575. 
2  "  Records  of  the  Past,"  vol.  ix.,  p.  152. 


46  BAB  YLON  AND  EG  YPT. 

eat  meat,  drink  wine,  make  music,  and  glorify  my 
divinity,  until  I  come  to  thee  and  this  vision  shall 
be  fulfilled.'  "  Rendered  confident  by  his  dream,  the 
Assyrian  monarch  marched  forth  to  war,  attacked  the 
Elamites  in  their  own  country,  defeated  them,  and 
received  their  submission.^ 

Not  very  long  after  the  time  of  Nebuchadnezzar, 
Nabonidus,  one  of  his  successors,  places  on  record  the 
following  incident :  "  In  the  beginning  of  my  long 
reign,"  he  says,  "  Merodach,  the  great  lord,  and  Sin, 
the  illuminator  of  heaven  and  earth,  the  strengthener 
of  all,  showed  me  a  dream.  Merodach  spake  thus 
with  me :  '  Nabonidus,  king  of  Babylon,  come  up 
with  the  horses  of  thy  chariot;  build  the  walls  of 
Ehulhul ;  and  have  the  seat  of  Sin,  the  great  lord, 
set  within  it.'  Reverently  I  made  answer  to  the  lord 
of  the  eods,  Merodach,  '  I  will  build  this  house  of 
which  thou  speakest.  The  Sabmanda  destroyed  it, 
and  strong  was  their  might'  Merodach  replied  to 
me,  '  The  Sabmanda  of  whom  thou  speakest,  they  and 
their  country,  and  the  king  who  rules  over  them, 
shall  cease  to  exist.'  In  the  third  year  he  {i.  e.,  Mero- 
dach) caused  Cyrus,  king  of  Ansan,  his  young  servant, 
to  go  with  his  little  army:  he  overthrew  the  wide- 
spreading  Sabmanda;  he  captured  Istumegu  (i.e.,  Asty- 
ages),  king  of  Sabmanda,  and  took  his  treasures  to  his 
own  land."^ 

*  "  Records  of  the  Past,"  vol.  vii.,  p.  68. 

2  "  Proceedings  of  the  Society  of  Biblical  Archseology,"  November, 
1882,  p.  7. 


NOTICES  IN  DANIEL.  47 

The  civil  organization  of  the  Babylonian  kingdom 
is  very  imperfectly  known  to  us.  Neither  sacred  nor 
profane  authorities  furnish  more  than  scattered  and 
incomplete  notices  of  it.  We  gather  from  Daniel 
merely  that  it  was  elaborate  and  complicated,  involv- 
ing the  employment  by  the  crown  of  numerous  officers, 
discharging  distinct  functions,  and  possessing  different 
degrees  of  dignity.  The  names  given  to  the  various 
officers  by  Daniel  can  scarcely  be  those  which  were 
in  actual  use  under  the  Babylonian  monarch,  since 
they  are  in  many  cases  of  Aryan  etymology.  Most 
likely  they  are  the  equivalents  under  the  Medo-Persic 
system,  which  was  established  before  Daniel  wrote  his 
book,  of  the  Babylonian  terms  previously  in  vogue. 
Still  in  some  instances  the  names  sufficiently  indicate 
the  offices  intended.  The  "  princes  "  (literally  "  satraps  ") 
of  Dan.  iii.  2,  3,  27,  can  only  be  governors  of  provinces 
(compare  ch.  vi.  i),  chief  rulers  under  the  monarch  of 
the  main  territorial  divisions  of  his  empire.  Such 
persons  had  been  generally  employed  by  the  Assyrian 
kings  in  the  government  of  the  more  settled  parts  of 
their  dominions,  and  were  no  doubt  continued  by  the 
Babylonians  when  the  territories  of  Assyria  were 
divided  between  them  and  the  Medes.  Gedaliah  held 
the  office  in  Judaea  immediately  after  its  conquest  by 
Nebuchadnezzar  (2  Kings  xxv.  22-25 ;  Jer.  xl.  5). 
Another  such  Babylonian  governor  is  actually  called 
a  "satrap "by  Berosus.^  Babylonian  witnesses  to  con- 
tracts still  in  existence  often  sign   themselves  "  gov- 

^  Ap.  Joseph.,  Coittr.  Apion.,  i.  19. 


48  BAB  YL ON  AND  EG  YP T. 

ernor,  "  sometimes  **  governor  "  of  a  province,  which 
they  mention.^  The  sagans  ("governors"  in  our 
version)  may  be  *'  governors  of  towns,"  who  are  often 
mentioned  in  the  inscriptions  as  distinct  from  gov- 
ernors of  provinces.  The  "judges  "  (literally  "noble 
judges")  are  no  doubt  the  heads  of  the  judicature, 
which  was  separate  from  the  executive  in  Babylonia, 
as  in  Persia.^  They,  too,  appear  in  the  inscriptions,^  as 
do  "  treasurers  "  and  "  captains."*  It  is  not  intended 
to  assert  that  the  correspondence  between  Daniel's 
account  of  the  civil  administration  and  that  indicated 
by  the  Babylonian  remains  is  very  close  or  striking, 
but  the  general  features  certainly  possess  considerable 
resemblance,  and  there  is  as  much  agreement  in  the 
details  as  could  fairly  be  expected. 

The  employment  of  eunuchs  at  the  Babylonian 
court,  under  the  presidency  of  a  "master  of  the 
eunuchs,"  is  analogous  to  the  well-known  practice  of 
the  Assyrians,  where  the  president,  or  "  master,"  bore 
the  title  of  rab-saris,  or  "  chief  eunuch  "  (2  Kings  xviii. 
17).  It  also  receives  illustration  from  the  story  of 
Nanarus,  as  told  by  Nicholas  of  Damascus,  a  writer 
whose  Asiatic  origin  makes  him  a  high  authority  upon 
the  subject  of  Oriental  habits.  Nanarus,  according  to 
him,  was  one  of  the  later  Babylonian  monarchs,  a 
successor  of  the   Belesis  who    appears    to    represent 

1"  Records  of  the  Past,"  vol.  ix.,  pp.  34,  92,  98,  107. 
2  Herod.,  iii.  31. 

3 "Records  of  the  Past,"  vol.  vii.,  p.  120;  vol.  xi.,  p.  103. 
*Ibid.,  vol.  ix.,  p.  104;  vol.  xi.,  p.  103. 


NOTICES  IN  DANIEL.  49 

Nabopolassar.  His  court  was  one  in  which  eunuchs  held 
all  the  most  important  positions  ;  and  the  head  eunuch, 
Mitraphernes,  was  the  chief  counsellor  of  the  king.^ 

The  delight  of  the  Babylonians  in  music,  and  the 
advanced  condition  of  the  art  among  them,  is  con- 
firmed and  illustrated  by  the  same  story  of  Nanarus. 
Nanarus,  according  to  Nicholas  maintained  at  his 
court  no  fewer  than  a  hundred  and  fifty  female  musi- 
cians, of  whom  some  sang,  while  others  played  upon 
instruments.  Among  the  instruments  indicated  are 
three  of  those  mentioned  in  Daniel — the  flute,  the 
cithern  ("harp,"  A.V.),  and  the  psaltery.  Sculpture 
does  not  readily  lend  itself  to  the  representation  of  so 
large  a  crowd,  but  we  see  in  a  bas-relief  of  a  date  a 
little  anterior  to  Nebuchadnezzar  a  band  of  twenty-six 
performers.^  At  least  eight  or  nine  different  instru- 
ments were  known  to  the  Assyrians,^  and  we  can 
therefore  feel  no  surprise  that  six  were  in  use  among 
the  Babylonians  of  Nebuchadnezzar's  time. 

Considerable  difficulty  has  been  felt  with  respect  to 
the  names  of  several  of  the  Babylonian  instruments. 
These  names  have  a  Greek  appearance ;  and  it  has 
been  asked  by  critics  of  reputation, "  How  could  Greek 
musical  instruments  have  been  used  at  Babylon  late  in 
the  seventh,  or  early  in  the  sixth  century  before  our 
era  ?  "  A  searching  analysis  of  the  words  themselves 
has  thrown  a  good  deal  of  doubt  on  several  of  the 

^  See  the  Fragm.  Hist.  Gr.,  vol.  iii.,  pp.  359-363. 
^"Ancient  Monarchies,"  vol.  i.,  p.  542. 
3  Ibid.,  pp.  529-539. 
5 


50  BAB  YL  ON  AND  E G  YPT. 

supposed  Greek  etymologies.  Kama  and  xc7>a?,  kitlieros 
and  xiddpiq^  sabkah  and  GaiJ.[ib7.rj  are  no  doubt  connected; 
but  one  of  them  is  a  root  common  to  Semitic  with 
Aryan,  while  the  other  two  passed  probably  from  the 
Orientals  to  the  Greeks.  The  Chaldee  karna  is 
Hebrew  keren,  and  is  at  least  as  old  in  Hebrew  as  the 
Pentateuch ;  kitJieros  is  Persian  sitareh,  Greek  y,iOdpi<i^ 
German  zither,  modern  Arabic  kootJiir ;  sabkah  is  from 
sabak,  a  well-known  Semitic  root,  and  is  an  appropriate 
name  for  a  "  harp  "  in  Hebrew  ;  ^  whereas  aaix^uxr^  is 
an  unmeaning  name  in  Greek.  To  derive  mdshrokitha 
from  abpiy^  requires  a  very  hardy  etymologist.  The 
two  words  may  conceivably  be  derivatives  from  one 
root ;  but  neither  can  possibly  have  been  the  direct 
parent  of  the  other.  Even  pesanterin  and  suniphojiyah 
though  so  near  to  (I'aXrripioy  and  aotKpajvia,  are  not 
allowed  by  all  critics  to  be  of  Greek  origin.^  Suppos- 
ing, however,  that  they  are,  and  that  they  imply  the 
use  by  the  Babylonians  of  Greek  instruments,  which 
brought  their  names  with  them  from  their  native 
country,  as  "  pianoforte  "  and  "  concertina  "  have  done 
with  us,  there  is  nothing  extraordinary  in  the  circum- 
stance. The  Assyrians  and  the  Greeks  came  into 
contact  in  Cyprus  as  early  as  the  reign  of  Sargon,^ 
whose  effigy  has  been  found  at  Idalium.  Esar-haddon 
obtained  building  materials  from  several  Cyprian  kings 
with  Greek  names.'*     As  the  inheritress  of  Assyrian 

1  Pusey's  "  Daniel,"  p.  24,  note  9.    -  2  jbjd.^  pp,  27-30. 

2"  Ancient  Monarchies,"  vol.  ii.,  p.  150. 
*  "  Records  of  the  Past,"  vol.  iii.,  p.  108. 


NOTICES  IN  DANIEL. 


51 


luxury  and  magnificence,  Babylon  would  necessarily 
have  some  connection  with  Greeks.  We  hear  of  a  Greek 
having  served  in  Nebuchadnezzar's  army,  and  won 
glory  and  reward  under  his  banners.^  Direct  inter- 
course with  Hellenes  may  thus  have  brought  Hellenic 
instruments  to  Babylon.  Or  the  intercourse  may  have 
been  indirect.  The  Phoenicians  were  engaged  in  a 
carrying  trade  between  Europe  and  Asia  from  a  time 
anterior  to  Solomon ;  and  their  caravans  were  con- 
tinually passing  from  Tyre  and  Sidon,  by  way  of 
Tadmor  and  Thapsacus,  to  the  Chaldaean  capital. 
Nothing  would  be  more  natural  than  the  importation 
into  that  city,  at  any  time  between  b.  c.  605  and  b.  c. 
538,  of  articles  manufactured  in  Greece,  which  the 
Babylonians  were  likely  to  appreciate. 

The  position  of  the  king  in  the  Babylonian  court, 
as  absolute  lord  and  master  of  the  lives  and  liberties 
even  of  the  greatest  of  his  subjects,  able  to  condemn 
to  death,  not  only  individuals  (ch.  iii.  19),  but  a  whole 
class,  and  that  class  the  highest  in  the  state  (ch.  ii.  12- 
14),  is  thoroughly  in  accordance  with  all  that  profane 
history  tells  us  of  the  Babylonian  governmental  sys- 
tem. In  Oriental  monarchies  it  was  not  always  so. 
The  writer  of  the  Book  of  Daniel  shows  a  just  appre- 
ciation of  the  difference  between  the  Babylonian  and 
the  Medo-Persian  systems,  when  he  makes  Darius  the 
Mede  influenced  by  his  nobles,  and  compelled  to  do 
things  against  his  will  by  a  "  law  of  the  Medes  and 
Persians,  which  altered   not"  (ch.  vi.   14-17);    while 

1  Strab.  xiii.  3,  \  2. 


5 2  BAB YL ON  AND  EGYPT. 

Nebuchadnezzar  the  Babylonian  is  wholly  untram- 
meled,  and  does  not  seem  even  to  consult  his  lords  on 
matters  where  the  highest  interests  of  the  state  are 
concerned.  Babylonian  and  Assyrian  monarchs  were 
absolute  in  the  fullest  sense  of  the  word.  No  tradi- 
tional "  law  "  restrained  them.  Their  nobility  was  an 
official  nobility,  like  that  of  Turkey  at  the  present  day. 
They  themselves  raised  it  to  power ;  and  it  lay  with 
them  to  degrade  its  members  at  their  pleasure.  Officers 
such  as  the  tartan,  or  ''  commander-in-chief,"  the  rab- 
shakeh,  or  "  chief  cup-bearer,"  and  the  rab-saris,  or 
"  chief  eunuch,"  held  the  highest  positions  (2  Kings 
xviii.  17) — mere  creatures  of  the  king,  whom  a  "breath 
had  made,"  and  a  breath  could  as  easily  "  unmake." 
The  kings,  moreover,  claimed  to  be  of  Divine  origin, 
and  received  Divine  honours.  "  Merodach,"  says 
Nebuchadnezzar,  "  deposited  my  germ  in  my  mother's 
womb."  ^  Khammurabi  claims  to  be  the  son  of  Mero- 
dach and  Ri.^  He  was  joined  in  inscriptions  with  the 
great  gods,  Sin,  Shamas,  and  Merodach,  during  his 
lifetime,  and  people  swore  by  his  name.^  Amaragu 
and  Naram-sin  are  also  said  to  have  been  deified  while 
still  living.^  It  was  natural  that  those  who  claimed, 
and  were  thought  to  hold  so  exalted  a  position,  should 
exercise  a  despotic  authority,  and  be  unresisted,  even 
when  they  were  most  tyrannical. 

1"  Records  of  the  Past,"  vol.  v.,  p.  1 13. 

2  Ibid.,  vol.  i.,  p.  8.  ^  Ibid.,  vol.  v.,  p.  109, 

*See  note  on  Dan.  vi.  7,  in  the  "Speakers'  Commentary." 


CHAPTER  V. 

FURTHER    NOTICES    OF    BABYLON    IN    DANIEL. 

The  character  of  Nebuchadnezzar,  as  depicted  in  the 
Book  of  Daniel,  is  confirmed  as  fully  as  could  be  ex- 
pected, considering  the  nature  of  the  materials  that 
have  come  down  to  us  from  profane  sources.  These 
materials  are  scanty,  and  of  a  peculiar  character. 
They  consist  of  a  very  few  brief  notices  in  classical 
writers,  and  of  some  half-dozen  inscriptions  belonging 
to  the  reign  of  Nebuchadnezzar  himself,  and  appar- 
ently either  composed  by  him  or,  at  least,  put  forth 
under  his  authority.  These  inscriptions  are  in  some 
cases  of  considerable  length,^  and,  so  far,  might  seem 
ample  for  the  purpose  whereto  we  propose  to  apply 
them ;  but,  unfortunately,  they  present  scarcely  any 
variety.  With  the  exception  of  one,  which  is  histor- 
ical, but  very  short  and  much  mutilated,"  they  are 
accounts  of  buildings,  accompanied  by  religious  invo- 
cations.    It  is  evident  that  such  records  do  not  afford 

^  One  of  them  consists  of  ten  columns,  with  an  average  of  sixty-two 
lines  in  each,  and  in  the  "Records  of  the  Past"  occupies  twenty-three 
pages  (vol.  iii.,  pp.  1 13-135). 

2  See  the  "  Transactions  of  the  Society  of  Bibl.  Archteology,"  vol. 
vii.,  pp.  218-222. 

5*  53 


54  BAB YL ON  AND  EGYPT. 

much  opportunity  for  the  display  of  more  than  a  few 
points  of  character.  They  can  tell  us  nothing  of  those 
qualities  which  are  called  forth  in  action,  in  the  deal- 
ings of  man  with  man,  in  war,  in  government,  in 
domestic  intercourse.  Thus  the  confirmation  which 
it  is  possible  to  adduce  from  this  source  can  only  be 
partial ;  and  it  is  supplemented  only  to  a  very  small 
extent  from  the  notices  of.  the  classical  writers. 

The  most  striking  features  of  Nebuchadnezzar's 
character,  as  portrayed  for  us  in  Scripture,  and  espe- 
cially in  the  Book  of  Daniel,  will  probably  be  allowed 
to  be  the  following:  i.  His  cruelty.  Not  only  is  he 
harsh  and  relentless  in  his  treatment  of  the  foreign 
enemies  who  have  resisted  him  in  arms,  tearincr  thou- 
sands  from  their  homes,  and  carrying  them  off  into  a 
miserable  and  hopeless  captivity,  massacring  the  chief 
men  by  scores  (2  Kings  xxv.  18-21),  blinding  rebel 
kings  (ver.  7),  or  else  condernning  them  to  perpetual 
imprisonment  (ver.  27),  and  even  slaying  their  sons 
before  their  eyes  (ver  7) ;  but  at  home  among  his  sub- 
jects he  can  condemn  to  death  a  whole  class  of  per- 
sons for  no  fault  but  inability  to  do  what  no  one  had 
ever  been  even  asked  to  do  before  (Dan.  ii.  10-13), 
and  can  actually  cast  into  a  furnace  of  fire  three  of  his 
best  officers,  because  they  decline  to  worship  an 
image  (iii.  20-23).  2.  His  pride  and  boastfulness. 
The  pride  of  Nebuchadnezzar  first  shows  -itself  in 
Scripture  in  the  contemptuous  inquiry  addressed  to 
the  "  three  children  "  (Dan  iii.  15),  "  Who  is  that  God 
that  shall  deliver  you  out  of  my  hands  ?  "     Evidently 


NOTICES  IN  DANIEL.  55 

he  believes  that  this  is  beyond  the  power  of  any  god. 
He  speaks,  as  Sennacherib  spoke  by  the  mouth  of 
Rab-shakeh :  "  Hearken  not  to  Hezekiah,  when  he 
persuadeth  you,  saying.  The  Lord  will  deliver  us. 
Hath  any  of  the  gods  of  the  nations  delivered  at  all 
his  land  out  of  the  hand  of  the  king  of  Assyria? 
Where  are  the  gods  of  Hamath  and  of  Arpad  ? 
Where  are  the  gods  of  Sepharvaim,  Hena,  and  Ivah  ? 
Have  they  delivered  Samaria  out  of  mine  hand  ?  Who 
are  they  among  the  gods  of  the  countries,  that  have 
delivered  their  country  out  of  mine  hand,  that  the 
Lord  should  deliver  Jerusalem  out  of  mine  hand  ?  " 
(2  Kings  xviii.  32-35,)  The  event  shows  him  that  he 
is  mistaken,  and  that  there  is  a  God  who  can  deliver 
His  servants,  and  "  change  the  king's  word  "  (Dan. 
iii.  38),  and  then  for  a  time  he  humbles  himself;  but, 
later  on,  the  besetting  sin  breaks  out  afresh ;  "  his 
heart  is  lifted  up,  and  his  mind  hardened  in  pride " 
(ch.  V.  20),  and  he  makes  the  boast  which  brings  upon 
him  so  signal  a  punishment :  "  Is  not  this  great  Baby- 
lon that  I  have  built  for  the  house  of  my  kingdom,  by 
the  might  of  my  power,  and  for  the  Jionour  of  my 
majesty?''  The  punishment  inflicted  once  more  hum- 
bled him,  and  he  confessed  finally  that  there  was  one, 
"  the  King  of  heaven,  all  whose  works  were  truth,  and 
His  ways  judgment;"  and  that  "those  who  walk  in 
pride  He  was  able  to  abase "  (ch.  iv.  37).  3.  His 
religiousness.  The  spoils  which  Nebuchadnezzar 
carried  off  from  the  Temple  at  Jerusalem  he  did  not 
convert  to  his  own  use,  nor  even  bring  into  the  national 


56  BABYLON  A ND  EGYPT. 

treasury ;  but  "  put  them  in  his  temple  at  Babylon " 
(2  Chron.  xxxvi.  7),  and  *'  brought  them  into  the 
treasure-house  of  his  god  "  (Dan.  i.  2).  When  Daniel 
revealed  to  him  his  dream  and  its  interpretation  (ch. 
ii.  27-45),  he  at  once  confessed,  "  Of  a  truth  your  God 
is  a  God  of  gods,  and  a  Lord  of  kings,  and  a  revealer 
of  secrets,  seeing  thou  couldst  reveal  this  secret." 
The  image  which  he  made,  and  set  up  on  the  plain  of 
Dura,  was  not  his  own  image,  but  an  image  of  a  Baby- 
lonian god  (ch.  iii.  12,  14,  18),  to  whom  he  was  anxious 
that  all  his  subjects  should  do  honour.  His  anger 
against  Shadrach,  Meshach,  and  Abed-nego  was  not  so 
much  because  they  resisted  his  will,  as  because  they 
would  not  "  serve  his  god."  When  the  fiery  furnace 
had  no  power  on  them,  he  accepted  the  fact  as  proving 
that  there  was  another  God,  whom  he  had  not  known 
of  previously,  and  at  once  commanded  that  this  new 
God  should  be  respected  throughout  his  dominions 
(ch.  iii.  29).  But  his  religiousness  culminates  in  the 
last  scene  of  his  life  that  is  presented  to  us  in  Scrip- 
ture. After  his  recovery  from  the  severe  affliction 
whereby  his  pride  was  punished,  he  at  once,  "  lifted 
up  his  eyes  to  heaven,"  and  "  blessed  the  Most  High, 
and  praised  and  honoured  Him  that  liveth  for  ever  " 
(ch.  iv.  34),  and  made  a  proclamation,  which  he 
caused  to  be  published  throughout  the  length  and 
breadth  of  his  vast  dominions  (ver.  i),  acknowledging 
his  sin,  and  declaring  that  he  "  honoured  and  extolled 
the  King  of  heaven  "  (ver.  37),  and  "  thought  it  good 
to  show  the  sicrns  and  wonders  that  the  hi":h  God  had 


NOTICES  IN  DANIEL.  57 

wrought  towards  him  "  (ver.  2),  since  "  His  signs  were 
great,  and  His  wonders  mighty,  and  His  kingdom  an 
everlasting  kingdom,  and  His  dominion  from  genera- 
tion to  generation  "  (ver.  3). 

A  fourth  and  special  characteristic  of  Nebuchad- 
nezzar, peculiar  to  him  among  the  heathen  monarchs 
brought  under  our  notice  in  Scripture,  is  the  mixed 
character  of  his  religion,  the  curious  combination  which 
it  presents  of  monotheism  with  polytheism,  the  worship 
of  one  God  with  that  of  many.  Nebuchadnezzar's 
polytheism  is  apparent  when  he  addresses  Daniel  as 
"  one  in  whom  is  the  spirit  of  the  holy  gods  "  (ch.  iv. 
8,  9,  18),  and  again  when  he  calls  the  figure  which  he 
sees  walking  with  the  "  three  children  "  in  the  furnace 
"a  son  of  the  gods''  pn'^x-ia,  bar-ddJiiii  (ch.  iii.  25), 
and  still  more  plainly  when  he  recognizes  the  God 
who  has  delivered  the  "  children  "  as  a  God,  "  their 
God"  (ver.  28),  and  declares  his  belief  that  "no 
otJier  god  can  deliver  after  this  sort''  (ver.  29).  His 
monotheism  shows  itself — though  not  made  apparent 
in  our  version — when  he  sets  up  a  single  image,  and 
calls  on  the  people  to  worship  "  his  god  "  (ch.  iii.  14), 
when  he  recognizes  Daniel's  God  as  "  a  Lord  of  kings 
and  God  of  gods"  (ch.  ii.  47),  and  most  conspicuously 
when  in  his  last  proclamation  he  acknowledges  "  the 
high  God  "  (5<^S;;  ^'7"??',  eldhd  'il/dyd,  ch.  iv.  2),  "  the 
Most  High  "  (ver.  34),  "  the  King  of  heaven  "  (ver.  37), 
Him  that  "  liveth  for  ever  "  (ver.  34),  and  ''doctJi  accord- 
ing to  His  will  in  the  army  of  heaven  and  among  the 
inhabitants  of  the  earth,"  and  "  whose  hand  none  can 


58  BAB  YL  ON  AND  E G  YFT. 

stay,  nor  can  any  say  unto  Him,  What  doest  thou?" 
(ver.  35.)  Either  he  fluctuates  between  two  beliefs,  or 
else  his  polytheism  is  of  that  modified  kind  which  has 
been  called  "  Kathenotheism,"  ^  where  the  worshipper, 
on  turning  his  regards  to  any  particular  deity,  "  forgets 
for  the  time  being  that  there  is  any  other,  and  addresses 
the  object  of  his  adoration  in  terms  of  as  absolute 
devotion  as  if  he  were  the  sole  god  w^hom  he  rec- 
ognized, the  one  and  only  divine  being  in  the  entire 
universe."  ^ 

Limiting  ourselves,  for  the  present,  to  these  four 
characteristics  of  the  great  Babylonian  monarch — his 
cruelty,  his  boastful  pride,  his  religiousness,  and  the 
curious  mixture  of  two  elements  in  his  religion — let  us 
inquire  how  far  they  are  confirmed  or  illustrated  by 
his  own  inscriptions,  or  by  the  accounts  which  profane 
writers  have  given  of  him. 

And  first,  with  respect  to  his  cruelty.  Here,  it 
must  be  confessed,  there  is  little,  if  any,  confirmation. 
The  one  brief  historical  inscription  of  Nebuchad- 
nezzar's time  which  we  possess  contains  no  notice  of 
any  severities,  nor  is  the  point  touched  in  the  few 
fragments  concerning  him  which  are  all  that  classical 
literature  furnishes.  Berosus  mentions  the  numerous 
captives  whom  he  carried  off  to  Babylonia  in  his  first 
campaign,^  but  does  not  seem  to  regard  their  fate  as 
exceptionally  wretched.     Josephus  gives  us  in  some 

^Max  Miiller,  "Chips  from  a  Gennan  Workshop,"  vol.  i.,  p.  28. 
2  See  the  author's  "  Religions  of  the  Ancient  World,"  A/ncn'canEd., 
p.  108.  •'' Ap.  Joseph.,  Ant.  Jiid.^  x.  ii,  ^  i. 


NOTICES  IN  DANIEL.  59 


detail  the  various  cruelties  recorded  of  him  in  Scrip- 
ture, and  adds  others,  as  that  he  put  to  death  a  king 
of  Egypt  whom  he  conquered;^  but  Josephus  is 
scarcely  an  unprejudiced  witness.  Abydenus,  who 
tells  us  more  about  him  than  any  other  classical  writer 
except  Berosus,  is  bent  on  glorifying  him,  and  would 
not  be  likely  to  mention  what  was  to  his  discredit.  If, 
however,  we  have  no  confirmation,  we  have  abundant 
illustrations  of  Nebuchadnezzar's  cruelties  in  the 
accounts  given  us  of  their  own  doings  by  the  Assyrian 
monarchs  to  whose  empire  Nebuchadnezzar  had  suc- 
ceeded. Assyrian  monarchs  transport  entire  nations 
to  distant  lands,  massacre  prisoners  by  scores  or 
hundreds,  put  captive  kings  to  death,  or  mutilate 
them,  cut  men  to  pieces,^  and  even  burn  them  to  death 
in  furnaces.^  The  recorded  cruelties  of  Nebuchad- 
nezzar pale  before  those  which  Asshur-bani-pal,  the 
son  of  Esar-haddon,  who  lived  less  than  a  century 
earlier,  mentions  as  commanded  by  himself,  and  exe- 
cuted under  his  orders.*^ 

Nebuchadnezzar's  pride  and  boastfulness  were  noted 
by  Abydenus,  who  spoke  of  him  as  siiperbia  tuniidus 
and  fastii  elattis^  His  own  inscriptions  not  only 
accumulate  on  him  titles  of  honour  and  terms  of 
praise,  but  seem  altogether  composed  with  the  object 

*Ap.  Joseph.,  Ant.  Jud.,  x.  9,  ?  7.  '     ^ 

2  "  Records  of  the  Past,"  vol.  ix.,  p.  57. 

^  Ibid.,  vol.  i.,  p.  77  ;  vol,  ix.,  p.  56,  etc. 

*  Ibid.,  vol.  i  ,  pp.  57-102. 

5  "  Fr.  Hist.  Grcec,"  vol.  iv.,  p.  283,  Fr.  8. 


6o  BAB  YLON  AND  EG  YPT. 

of  glorifying  himself  rather  than  the  deities  whom  they 
profess  to  eulogise.  Among  the  titles  which  he 
assumes  are  those  of  ''glorious  prince,"  "the  exalted," 
or  **  the  exalted  chief,"  '*  the  possessor  of  intelligence," 
"  he  who  is  firm,  and  not  to  be  overthrown,"  "  the 
valiant  son  of  Nabopolassar,"  "  the  devout  and  pious," 
*'  the  lord  of  peace,"  ''  the  noble  king,"  and  "  the  wise 
Mage."  ^  Nebuchadnezzar  declares  that  "  the  god 
Merodach  deposited  his  germ  in  his  mother's  womb," 
that  ''  Nebo  gave  into  his  hand  the  sceptre  of  righteous- 
ness," that  Sin  was  '*  the  strengthener  of  his  hands," 
that  Shamas  '*  perfected  good  in  his  body,"  and  Gula 
"beautified  his  person."^  He  boasts  that  he  is  "the 
eldest  son  of  Merodach,"  who  has  made  him  "  the 
chosen  of  his  heart  ;"^  he,  for  his  part,  is  "the  rejoicer 
of  the  heart  of  Merodach."*  "Merodach  has  made 
him  a  surpassing  prince ; "  he  "  has  extended  Mero- 
dach's  power  ;"^  owing  his  own  exaltation  to  Mero- 
dach and  Nebo,  he  has  exalted  them  in  turn  ;  and  the 
impression  left  is  that  they  have  had  rather  the  better 
of  the  bargain.  Other  Babylonian  kings  are  moderate 
in  their  self-praise  compared  with  Nebuchadnezzar,  as 
may  be  seen  by  his  inscriptions  and  those  of  Neriglissar 
and  Nabonidus. 

The  religiousness  of  Nebuchadnezzar  is  even  more 
conspicuous  in  his  inscriptions  than  his  pride.  Not 
only  was  he,  as  a  modern  writer  expresses  if,  "  faithful 

1  "  Records  of  the  Past,"  vol.  v.,  pp.  1 13,  1 14;  vol.  vii.,  pp.  71,  75. 

2  Ibid.,  vol.  v.,  pp.  113,  114,  122,  123.  3  Ibid.,  p.  125. 
*  Ibid.,  p.  134.  6  Ibid.,  p.  134. 


NOTICES  IN  DANIEL.  6i 

to  the  orthodoxy  of  his  day,"^  but  a  real  devotion  to 
his  gods  seems  to  have  animated  him.  His  own  name 
for  himself  is  "the  heaven-adoring  king."^  He  places 
some  god,  generally  Merodach,  in  the  forefront  of 
every  inscription ;  acknowledges  that  his  life  and 
success  were  the  fruit  of  the  divine  favour ;  labours  to 
show  his  gratitude  by  praises  and  invocations,  by  the 
presentation  of  offerings,  the  building  and  repair  of 
temples,  the  adornment  of  shrines,  the  institution  of 
processions,  and  the  proclamation  of  each  god  by  his 
proper  titles.^  He  speaks  of  Merodach  "  accepting  the 
devotion  of  his  heart;'"*  and  there  is  no  reason  to 
doubt  that  he  speaks  sincerely.  He  looks  to  his 
deities  for  blessings,  beseeches  them  to  sustain  his  life, 
to  keep  reverence  for  them  in  his  heart,  to  give  him  a 
long  reign,  a  firm  throne,  abundant  and  vigorous 
offspring,  success  in  war,  and  a  record  of  his  good 
deeds  in  their  book.^  He  hopes  that  these  good  deeds 
are  acceptable  to  them,  and  are  regarded  with  satisfac- 
tion :  whether  he  expects  them  to  be  rewarded  in 
another  life  is  not  apparent. 

The  peculiar  character  of  Nebuchadnezzar's  religion 
— at  one  time  polytheistic,  at  another  monotheistic — is 
also  evidenced  by  his  inscriptions.  The  polytheism 
is  seen  in  the  distinct  and  separate  acknowledgment  of 
at  least  thirteen   deities,  to   most  of  whom  he  builds 

*G.  Smith,  "History  of  Babylonia,"  p.  167. 
2  "  Records  of  the  Past,"  vol.  vii.,  p.  78. 

^  Ibid.,  vol.  v.,  pp.  113,  114,  etc.  *  Ibid.,  p.  114. 

^  Ibid.,  vol.  vii.,  pp.  72-77. 
6 


62  BAB  YL ON  AND  EG  YPT. 


temples,  as  well  as  in  his  mention  of  "  the  great  gods,"  ^ 
and  the  expressions  "  chief  of  tlic  gods,''  "  king  of 
gods,''  and  "  god  oi gods,"  which  are  of  frequent  occur- 
rence. The  monotheism,  or  at  least  the  "  katheno- 
theism,"  discloses  itself  in  the  attitude  assumed  towards 
Merodach,  who  is  ''  the  great  Lord,"  *'  the  God  his 
maker,"  "  the  Lord  of  all  beings,"  "  the  Prince  of  the 
lofty  house,"  "  the  chief,  the  honourable,  the  Prince  of 
the  gods,  the  great  Merodach,"  "  the  Divine  Prince,  the 
Deity  of  heaven  and  earth,  the  Lord  God,"  "  the  King 
of  gods  and  Lord  of  lords,"  "  the  chief  of  the  gods," 
"  the  Lord  of  the  gods,"  ''the  God  of  gods,"  and  "  the 
King  of  heaven  and  earth."  Nebuchadnezzar  assigns 
to  Merodach  a  pre-eminence  which  places  him  on  a 
pedestal  apart  from  and  above  all  the  other  deities  of 
his  pantheon.  He  does  not  worship  him  exclusively, 
but  he  worships  him  mainly ;  and  when  engaged  in 
the  contemplation  of  his  greatness,  scarcely  takes  into 
account  the  existence  of  any  other  deity.  No  other 
Babylonian  king  is  so  markedly  the  votary  of  one  god 
as  Nebuchadnezzar ;  though,  no  doubt,  something  of 
a  similar  spirit  may  be  traced  in  the  inscriptions  of 
Khammurabi,  of  Neriglissar,  and  of  Nabonidus. 

Besides  the  main  traits  of  character,  of  which  we 
have  hitherto  spoken,  there  are  certain  minoj  features 
in  the  biblical  portraiture  which  seem  entitled  to  men- 
tion. Nebuchadnezzar  is  brave  and  energetic.  He 
leads  his  armies  in  person  (2  Kings  xxiv.  i,  10;  xxv. 


^"Records  of  the  Past,"  vol.  v.,  p.   129;   "Trans,  of  Bibl.   Arch. 
Soc,"  vol.  vii.,  p.  219. 


NO  TICKS  IN  DA  NIEL .  63 

i;  Jer.  xxi.  2;  xxiv.  i;  xxxiv.  i,  etc.),  presses  his 
enterprises  vigorously,  is  not  easily  discouraged  or 
rebuffed,  has  the  qualities  of  a  good  general,  is  brave, 
"  bold  in  design,  and  resolute  in  action."  ^  His  own 
inscriptions  so  far  agree,  that  they  represent  him 
as  making  war  upon  Egypt,^  as  desiring  "the  conquest 
of  his  enemies'  land,"^  and  as  looking  forward  to  the 
accumulation  at  his  great  Babylonian  temple  of  "  the 
abundant  tribute  of  the  kings  of  nations  and  of  all 
people."  ^  Profane  historians  go  far  beyond  this  ;  they 
represent  him  as  one  of  the  greatest  of  conquerors. 
Berosus  ascribes  to  him  the  conquest  of  Syria,  Phoe- 
nicia, Egypt,  and  Arabia  !  ^  Abydenus  says  that  he 
was  "more  valiant  than  Hercules,"  and  not  only 
reduced  Egypt,  but  subdued  all  Libya,  as  far  as  the 
Straits  of  Gibraltar,  and  thence  passing  over  into 
Spain,  conquered  the  Iberians,  whom  he  took  with 
him  to  Asia,  and  settled  in  the  country  between  Ar- 
menia and  the  Caucasus  !  ^  Menander  and  Philostratus 
spoke  of  his  thirteen-y ears-long  siege  of  Tyre  ; ''  and 
Megasthenes  put  him  on  a  par  with  Sesostris  and 
Tirhakah.« 

The  religion  of  Nebuchadnezzar  was,  as  might  have 
been  expected,  tinged  with  superstition.  We  are  told 
in  Scripture  that  on  one  occasion  a  "  king  of  Babylon," 

^  G.  Smith,  "  History  of  Babylonia,"  p.  166. 

2 "  Transactions  of  Society  of  Bibl.  Archaeology,"  vol.  vii.,  p.  220. 

3"  Records  of  the  Past,"  vol.  vii.,  p.  77.         *Ibid.,  vol.  v.,  p  135. 

^  See  the  fragments  of  Berosus  in  the  "  Fr.  Hist.  Gr.,"  vol.  ii.,  fr.  14. 

*  Ibid.,  vol.  iv.,  p.  283,  Fr.  9. 

■^  Ap.  Joseph.,  Ant.  Jud.,  x.  ii,  ^  1, sub  fin.     ^  Ap.  Strab.,  xv.  i,  \  6. 


54  BAB  YLON  AND  EG  YPT. 

who  can  be  no  other  than  he,  in  one  of  his  mihtary 
expeditions,  "stood  at  the  parting  of  the  way,  at  the 
head  of  the  two  ways,  to  use  divination.  He  made 
his  arrows  bright  (or  rather,  '  he  shook  his  arrows ') ; 
he  consulted  with  images  ;  he  looked  in  the  Hver.  At 
his  right  hand  was  the  divination  for  Jerusalem " 
(Ezek.  xxi.  21,  22).  That  is  to  say,  having  come  to  a 
certain  point  on  his  march,  where  the  road  parted, 
leading  on  the  right  hand  towards  Jerusalem,  and 
on  the  left  towards  Rabbath  of  Ammon,  instead  of 
deciding  on  his  course  by  military  considerations,  he 
employed  divination,  and  allowed  his  campaign  to  be 
determined  by  a  use  of  lots  and  a  consultation  of  the 
entrails  of  victims.  He  showed  an  equal  supersti- 
tiousness  when,  as  we  read  on  the  Borsippa  cylinder,^ 
he  could  not  allow  himself  to  commence  the  work  of 
restoration,  which  the  great  temple  of  the  Seven 
Spheres  so  imperatively  needed,  until  he  had  first  waited 
for  "  a  fortunate  month,"  and  in  that  fortunate  month 
found  an  "auspicious  day."  Then,  at  length,  "the 
bricks  of  its  wall,  and  the  slabs  that  covered  it,  the 
finest  of  them,  he  collected,  and  rebuilt  the  ruins  firmly. 
Inscriptions  written  in  his  own  name  he  placed  within 
it,  in  the  finest  apartments  (?),  and  of  completing  the 
upper  part  he  made  an  end."  ^  It  has  been"  said  that 
all  Babylonian  kings  were  equally  superstitious,  and 
even  that  "  the  Babylonians  never  started  on  an  expe- 
dition, or  commenced  any  work,  without  consulting 

^  Sir  H.  Rawlinson  in  the  author's  "  Herodotus,"  vol,  ii.,  p.  586. 
2"  Records  of  the  Past,"  vol.  vii.,  p.  77. 


NOTICES  IN  DANIEL.  65 

the  omens," '  but  no  proof  has  been  given  of  this 
assertion,  and  certainly  neither  NerigHssar  nor  Nabo- 
nidus  relate  that  they  waited  for  "  fortunate  days  "  to 
commence  their  works  of  restoration. 

No  doubt  there  are  points  in  the  character  of 
Nebuchadnezzar  with  respect  to  which  neither  his  own 
inscriptions  nor  the  remains  of  classical  antiquity 
furnish  any  illustration.  His  hasty  and  violent  temper, 
quick  to  take  offence,  and  rushing  at  once  to  the  most 
extreme  measures  (Dan.  ii.  9,  12 ;  iii.  13,  19),  is  known 
to  us  only  from  the  Book  of  Daniel,  and  the  writers 
who  follow  that  book  in  their  account  of  him;  e.g., 
Josephus.  His  readiness  to  relent,  and  his  kindly 
impulse  to  make  amends  (ch.  ii.  46,49;  iii.  26-30),  are 
also  traits  unnoticed  by  profane  authors,  and  unap- 
parent  in  his  inscriptions.  But  no  surprise  ought  to 
be  felt  at  this.  We  could  only  expect  to  find  evidence 
of  such  qualities  in  inscriptions  of  a  different  character 
from  those  which  have  come  down  to  us.  Should  the 
annals  of  Nebuchadnezzar  ever  be  recovered,  and 
should  they  be  on  the  scale  of  those  left  by  Asshur- 
bani-pal,  or  even  those  of  Sennacherib,  Sargon,  and 
other  earlier  Assyrian  kings,  we  might  not  improbably 
meet  with  indications  of  the  great  king's  moods  and 
temperament.  The  one  historical  inscription  which  we 
have  is  insufficient  for  the  purpose.  As  originally 
written,  it  extended  only  to  thirty  lines,  and  of  these 
there  is  not  one  which  is  not  mutilated.^     Nor  are  the 

1 "  Records  of  the  Past,"  vol.  v.,  p.  58. 

'^  See  "Transactions  of  Soc.  of  Bibl.  Arch.,"  vol.  vii,,  pp.  218-222. 
5 


66  BAB YL ON  AND  EGYPT. 

remains  of  the  profane  historians  who  treat  of  his  time 
such  as  naturally  to  supply  the  deficiency.  Of  the 
account  which  Berosus  gave  of  him,  we  possess  but 
one  considerable  fragment;  of  Abydenus,  we  have  two 
shorter  ones ;  the  remaining  writers  furnish  only  a  few 
sentences  or  a  few  lines.  It  is  unfortunate  that  this 
should  be  so;  but  so  it  is.  Had  the  *' Babylonian 
History "  of  Berosus  come  down  to  us  complete,  or 
had  kind  faith  permitted  that  Antimenides,  the  brother 
of  Alcaeus,  should  have  written,  and  time  have  spared 
a  record  of  his  Babylonian  experiences,  the  slighter 
details  and  more  delicate  shades  of  the  monarch's 
character  might  have  been  laid  open  to  us.  At  present 
we  have  to  content  ourselves  with  treating  the  broader 
features  and  more  salient  points  of  a  character  that 
was  not  without  many  minor  tones  and  some  curious 
complications. 


CHAPTER  VI. 

FURTHER    NOTICES    OF    BABYLON    IN    DANIEL. 

"  The  king  spake,  and  said,  Is  not  this  great  Babylon,  that  I  have 
built  for  the  house  of  the  kingdom  by  the  might  of  my  power,  and  for 
the  honour  of  my  majesty?" — Dan.  iv.  30. 

When  we  think  of  the  enormous  size  of  Babylon, 
according  to  the  most  trustworthy  accounts,  it  seems 
a  most  audacious  boast  on  the  part  of  any  one  man, 
that  he  had  built  the  whole  of  it.  Accordino-  to  Hero- 
dotus,^  who  represents  himself  as  having  visited  the 
city  about  b.  c.  450,  the  walls  formed  a  circuit  of  480 
stades,  or  fifty-five  miles,  enclosing  a  square  space, 
which  was  120  stades,  or  nearly  fourteen  miles  each 
way.  Strabo  reduced  the  circuit  to  385  stades,^  Quin- 
tus  Curtius  to  368,^  Clitarchus  to  365,^  and  Ctesias  to 
360.^.  If  we  accept  the  smallest  of  these  estimates,  it 
will  give  us  a  square  of  above  ten  miles  each  way,  and 
consequently  an  area  of  above  a  hundred  square  miles. 
This  is  a  space  four  times  as  great  as  that  of  Paris 
within  the  enceinte,  and  fully  double  that  of  London 
within  the  bills  of  mortality. 

1  Herod.,  i.  178.  ^gtrab.,  xvi.  i,  ^  5. 

3Vit.  Alex..  Magn.,  v.  i.         *  Ap.  Diod.  Sic,  ii.  7,  ^  3.         ^  Ibid. 

67 


68  BAB  YL  ON  AND  EG  YP T. 

No  doubt  it  is  true  that  only  a  portion  of  this 
immense  area  was  covered  by  buildings.  The  district 
within  the  walls  represented  a  vast  entrenched  camp, 
more  than  what  we  now  mean  by  a  city.^  Aristotle 
remarks  with  respect  to  it :  "  It  is  not  walls  by  them- 
selves that  make  a  town.  Otherwise  one  would  only 
have  to  surround  the  Peloponnese  with  a  wall  [in 
order  to  constitute  it  a  city].  The  case  is  the  same 
with  Babylon  and  all  other  towns,  the  walls  of  which 
enclose  rather  a  nation  than  a  body  of  citizens."^ 
Large  portions  of  the  space  enclosed  were  occupied  by 
gardens,  orchards,  and  palm  groves ;  some  part  of  it 
was  even  devoted  to  the  cultivation  of  corn.  It  was 
calculated  that,  in  case  of  a  siege,  the  inhabitants 
might,  by  making  the  best  use  of  all  the  unoccupied 
ground,  raise  grain  sufficient  for  their  own  consump- 
tion.^ Still,  the  area  devoted  to  buildings  was  very 
large.  The  royal  quarter,  or  palatial  inclosure,  as 
arranged  by  Nebuchadnezzar,  seems  to  have  extended 
some  miles,  both  in  length  and  breadth.  Outside  this 
was  the  city  proper,  laid  out  on  a  regular  plan,  in 
streets  cutting  each  other  at  right  angles,^  like  Man- 
heim  and  most  American  cities.  The  extent  of  this 
can  only  be  guessed,  for  "the  ninety  stades  "  of  Cur- 
tius  is  excessive  as  a  diameter,  insufficient  as  a  circum- 
ference. 

The  height  and  massive  character  of  the  buildings 

1  Lenormant,  "Manuel  d'Histoire  Ancienne,"  vol.  ii.,  p.  226. 

2  Ai-istot.  Pol.,  iii,  I,  sub  fin.  ^  Q.  Curt.,  1.  s.  c. 
*  Herod.,  i.  180. 


NOTICES  IN  DANIEL.  69 

was  as  remarkable  as  the  area  that  they  covered. 
Even  the  ordinary  houses  of  the  inhabitants  were,  in 
many  instances,  three  or  four  stories  high.^  The 
soHdity  and  strength  of  the  walls  was  most  extraor- 
dinary. Herodotus  estimates  their  width  at  fifty,  their 
height  at  two  hundred  cubits.^  He  adds  that  the  cubit 
of  which  he  speaks  is  one  of  unusual  length.  Diodo- 
rus  Siculus,  who  follows  Ctesias,  agrees  almost  exactly 
as  to  the  height,  which  he  makes  fifty  fathoms,^  or 
three  hundred  ordinary  feet.  Pliny*  and  Solinus^ 
reduce  the  three  hundred  feet  of  Diodorus  to  two 
hundred  and  thirty-five ;  while  Strabo,  who  may  be 
supposed  to  follow  the  historians  of  Alexander,  makes 
a  further  and  still  greater  reduction,  estimating  the 
height  at  no  more  than  seventy-five  feet.^  Even  this 
low  figure  implies  a  mass  of  brickwork  amounting  to 
thirteen  hundred  and  ninety  millions  (1,390,000,000) 
of  square  feet,  and  would  have  required  for  its  construc- 
tion at  least  three  times  that  number  of  the  largest 
bricks  known  to  the  Babylonians.  If  we  accept  the 
estimate  of  height  given  by  Pliny  and  Solinus,  we  must 
multiply  these  amounts  by  three ;  if  we  prefer  that  of 
Diodorus,  by  four ;  if  that  of  Herodotus,  by  four  and  a 
half  On  the  supposition  that  Herodotus  has  correctly 
reported  the  dimensions  of  the  wall  in  his  day,  to  build 
it  would  have  required  eighteen  thousand  seven 
hundred  and  sixty-five  millions  (18,765,000,000)  of 
the  largest  Babylonian  bricks  known  to  us. 

1  Herod.,  i.  180.  2  Ibid.,  i.  178.  5  Diod.  Sic,  ii.  7,  \  3. 

*  H.  iV.,  vi.  26.  5  "  Polyhist,"  |  60.     ^  suab.,  xvi.  i,  I  5. 


70  BAB  YL  ON  AND  EG  YPT. 

The  royal  quarter,  or  palatial  enclosure,  of  Neb- 
uchadnezzar's time,  comprised  three,  or  according  to 
some,^  four  principal  buildings.  These  were  the  old 
palace,  the  new  palace,  the  hanging  gardens,  and  (if  we 
allow  it  to  have  been  a  sort  of  adjunct  to  the  palace) 
the  great  temple  of  Bel-Merodach.  It  was  also 
guarded  by  a  wall,  which  Herodotus  declares  to  have 
been  "  very  little  inferior  in  strength"  to  the  outer  wall 
of  the  city  ;^  and  it  contained  further  a  vast  artificial 
reservoir.^  Some  account  must  be  given  of  these 
various  buildings  and  constructions  before  we  can 
appreciate  fully  Nebuchadnezzar's  greatness  as  a 
builder. 

The  "  old  palace  "  seems  to  be  represented  by  the 
modern  *'  mound  of  Amram."  This  is  a  huge  mass 
of  ruins,  almost  triangular  in  its  present  shape,  occupy- 
ing the  more  southern  portion  of  the  ancient  *'  royal 
city."  It  is  about  a  thousand  yards  along  its  south- 
western or  principal  side,  which  faced  the  river,  and 
has  perhaps  been  washed  into  its  present  receding  line 
by  water  action.  The  northern  face  of  the  mound 
measures  about  seven  hundred  yards,  and  the  eastern 
about  eight  hundred,  the  triangle  being  thus  scalene, 
with  its  shortest  side  facing  northwards.*  The  mound 
is  deeply  furrowed  with  ravines,  worn  by  the"  rains  in 

^  Oppeit,  "  Expedition  Scientifiqiie  en  Mesopotamie,"  vol.  i.,  Plan  of 
Babylon, 

2Herod.,  i.  i8i. 

^  See  the  "  Standard  Inscription  of  Nebuchadnezzar"  in  the  author's 
"  Herodotus,"  vol.  ii.,  p.  587. 

*  See  the  author's  "  Ancient  Monarchies,"  vol.  ii.,  pp.  525,  526. 


NO  TICES  IN  DANIEL .  7 1 

the  friable  soil ;  its  elevation  above  the  level  of  the 
plain  is  nowhere  very  considerable,  but  amounts  in 
places  to  about  fifty  or  sixty  feet.^  Excavators  have 
driven  galleries  into  it  in  various  directions,  but  have 
found  little  to  reward  their  labours  ;  no  walls  or  dis- 
tinct traces  of  buildings  of  any  kind  have  presented 
themselves.  A  few  bricks,  belonging  to  early  kings 
of  Babylon,  are  all  that  it  has  yielded, — enough, 
perhaps,  to  confirm  the  conjecture  that  it  represents 
the  site  of  the  "  old  palace,"  but  otherwise  uninterest- 
ing. The  huge  mass  seems  to  be,  in  reality,  less  a 
palace  than  a  palace  mound — the  basis  or  substratum 
on  which  once  stood  a  royal  edifice,  which  has  now 
wholly  disappeared.  It  was  no  doubt  purely  artificial; 
but  whether  originally  constructed  of  unbaked  bricks, 
or  merely  of  the  natural  soil  of  the  country,  may  be 
doubted.  At  present  it  consists  wholly  of  a  soft  and 
friable  mould,  interspersed  with  a  few  fragments  of 
bricks.  The  mound  covers  a  space  of  about  thirty- 
seven  acres.^ 

If  the  "  mound  of  Amram "  represents  the  "  old 
palace  "  of  the  Babylonian  kings,  the  "  new  palace," 
which  adjoined  it,^  can  scarcely  fail  to  be  correctly 
■identified  with  the  "  great  mound  "  which  immediately 
succeeds  the  Amram  mound  towards  the  north,  and, 
according  to  some  writers,  is  connected  with  it  by  a 
broad  causeway.*     The  name  Kasr,  or  "palace,"  still 

1  Rich,  "  Memoir  on  the  Ruins  of  Babylon,"  p.  61. 
'  Oppert,  "Expedition  Scientifique,"  vol.  i.,  p.  157. 
3  Beiosus,  ap.  Joseph.,  "Ant.  Jud."  x.  11,  ^  i.  *  Rich,  p.'62. 


72  BAB YLON  AND  EGYPT. 

attaches  to  this  mass  of  ruins.   The  "  Kasr  mound  "  is  an 
oblong  square,  about  seven  hundred  yards  long  by  six 
hundred   broad,    with    the    sides   facing    the    cardinal 
points.^     Like  the  Amram  hill,  it  is  wholly  of  artificial 
origin,  but  is  composed  of  somewhat  better  material,  as 
loose  bricks,  tiles,  and  fragments  of  stone.    It  contains 
at  least  one  subterranean  passage,  which  is  seven  feet 
high,  floored  and  walled  with  baked  bricks,  and  roofed 
over  with  great  blocks  of  sandstone,  which  reach  from 
side  to   side.     This  passage   may  have  been  either  a 
secret  exit  or  a  gigantic   drain — more  probably  the 
latter.     On  the  summit  of  the  mound  (which  is  seventy 
feet  above  the  level  of  the  plain),  not  very  far  from  the 
centre,  are   the  remains   of  the  palace  proper,  from 
which  the   mound  is   named.     This  is  a  building  of 
excellent    brick    masonry,    in    a   wonderful    state    of 
preservation,  consisting  of  walls,  piers,  and  buttresses, 
and  in  places  ornamented  with  pilasters,  but  of  too 
fragmentary  a  character  to  furnish  the  modern  inquirer 
with  any  clue  to  the  original  plan  of  the  edifice.     Pro- 
bably it   did  not  greatly  differ  from    the   palaces  of 
the   Assyrian    monarchs   at    Nimrud,   Koyunjik,  and 
Khorsabad,  consisting,  like  them,  of  a  series  of  courts, 
great  halls,   galleries,  and  smaller  apartments,  orna- 
mented throughout  with  sculptured  or  painted  figures, 
and  with   inscriptions    in  places.     Fragments  of  the 
ornamentation  have  been  found.     One  of  these  is  a 
portion  of  a  slab  of  stone,  representing  a  frieze,  where 
the   abacus  was    supported  by  a  series  of  figures  of 

1    "Ancient  Monarchies,"  vol.  ii.,  p.  524. 


NOTICES  IN  DANIEL,  73 

gods,  sculptured  in  low  relief,  with  their  names  attached 
to  them.^  The  remainder  are,  for  the  most  part,  frag- 
ments of  bricks,  one  side  of  which  was  painted  in 
brig-ht  colours,  and  covered  with  a  thick  enamel  or 
glaze.  "  The  principal  colours  are  a  brilliant  blue,  red, 
a  deep  yellow,  white,  and  black."  ^  Portions  of  the 
figures  of  men  and  animals  have  been  detected  upon 
these  fragments,  which  are  so  numerous  as  fully  to 
bear  out  the  statement  of  Diodorus,^  that  the  palace 
walls  were  artistically  adorned  with  coloured  repre- 
sentations of  war  scenes  and  hunting  scenes,  wherein 
the  kings,  and  sometimes  the  queens,  were  depicted 
on  horseback  or  on  foot,  contending  with  leopards  or 
with  lions,  and  with  spear  or  javelin  dealing  them 
their  death  stroke.  Such  were  the  "  men  portrayed 
upon  the  wall,"  which  the  Jewish  captives  saw  at 
Babylon,  and  on  which  they  doted ;  "  the  images  of 
the  Chaldeans  portrayed  with  vermilion,  girded  with 
girdles  upon  their  loins,  exceeding  in  dyed  attire  upon 
their  heads,  all  of  them  princes  to  look  to,  after  the 
manner  of  the  Babylonians  of  Chaldea,  the  land  of 
their  nativity"  (Ezek.  xxiii.  14,  15).  The  palace  is 
said  to  have  been  further  ornamented  with  statues;^ 
and  the  figure  of  a  colossal  lion,  which  stands  upon 
the  mound,  north-east  of  the  Kasr  building,  may  lend 
a  certain  support  to  this  statement. 

The  "  hanging  gardens "  were  regarded  as  one  of 

*"  Ancient  Monarchies,"  vol.  ii.,  p.  552. 
^Layard,  "Nineveh  and  Babylon,"  p.  507. 

3  Diod.  Sic,  ii.  8.  *  Ibid. 

7 


74  BAB  YL  ON  AND  E  G  YPT. 

the  seven  wonders  of  the  world.^  They  were  said  to 
have  been  constructed  for  the  delectation  of  a  Median 
princess,  who  disUked  the  flat  monotony  of  the  Baby- 
lonian plain,  and  longed  for  something  that  might 
remind  her  of  the  irregularities  of  nature  in  her  own 
country.^  The  construction  is  described  in  terms 
which  are  somewhat  difficult  to  understand ;  but,  by 
comparing  the  several  accounts,^  we  gather  that  the 
structure  was  a  square,  400  feet  each  way,  elevated  to 
the  height  of  at  least  150  feet,  and  consisting  of  sev- 
eral tiers  of  arches,  superimposed  one  upon  another, 
after  the  manner  employed  by  the  Romans  in  the  con- 
struction of  their  amphitheatres.  The  building  was 
divided  into  as  many  stories  as  there  were  tiers  of 
arches,  the  number  of  these  being  uncertain,  and  was 
supported  by  internal  walls  of  great  thickness.  In 
these  stories  were  many  palatial  apartments,  where 
visitors  rested  on  their  way  to  the  upper  terrace ;  and 
in  the  uppermost  story  was  a  room  containing 
hydraulic  machinery,  whereby  water  was  raised  from 
the  Euphrates  to  the  level  of  the  garden  itself  This 
was  superimposed  on  the  uppermost  tier  of  arches,  and 
was  a  flat  surface  composed  of  four  layers ;  first,  one 
of  reeds  mixed  with  bitumen  ;  next,  one  of  brickwork, 
then  one  of  lead,  and  finally  a  thick  layer  of  earth, 
affording  ample  depth  for  the  roots  of  the  largest  trees. 
The  garden   was    planted   with   trees   and   shrubs  of 

1  Abydenus,  Fr.  9,  ad  fin.\  Strab.,  xvi.  i,  |  5.       ^  Berosus,  Fr.  14, 
3  Those  of  Diod.  Sic.  (ii.  10),  Strabo  (xvi.  i,  I  5),  and  Q.  Curtius 
(V.  I). 


NOTICES  IN  DANIEL.  75 

various  kinds,  and  possibly  with  flowers,  though  they 
are  not  mentioned.  A  spacious  pleasure-ground  was 
thus  provided  as  an  adjunct  to  the  palace,  where  roy- 
alty was  secure  from  observation,  and  where  the 
dehghts  of  umbrageous  foliage,  flashing  fountains,  gay 
flower-beds,  and  secluded  walks  could  be  obtained  at 
the  cost  of  mounting  a  staircase  somewhat  longer  than 
those  of  our  great  London  and  Paris  hotels. 

The  great  temple  of  Bel-Merodach  is  probably  iden- 
tified with  the  massive  ruin  which  lies  due  north  of 
the  Kasr  mound,  at  the  distance  of  about  a  mile. 
This  is  a  vast  pile  of  brickwork,  of  an  irregular  quad- 
rilateral shape,  with  precipitous  sides  furrowed  by 
ravines,  and  with  a  nearly  flat  top.^  Of  the  four  faces 
of  the  ruin,  the  southern  seems  to  be  the  most  perfect. 
It  extends  a  distance  of  two  hundred  yards,  or  almost 
exactly  a  stade,  and  runs  nearly  in  a  straight  line  from 
east  to  west.  At  its  eastern  extremity  it  forms  a  right 
angle  with  the  east  face,  which  runs  nearly  due  north 
for  about  one  hundred  and  eighty  yards,  also  almost 
in  a  straight  line.  The  other  two  faces  are  very  much 
worn  away,  but  probably  in  their  original  condition 
corresponded  to  those  already  described.  The  building 
was  thus  not  an  exact  square,  but  a  parallelogram,  with 
the  shorter  sides  proportioned  to  the  longer  as  nine 
to  ten.  The  ruin  rises  towards  its  centre,  where  it 
attains  an  elevation  of  nearly  one  hundred  and  forty 
feet.  It  shows  signs  of  having  been  enclosed  within 
a  precinct.     Beyond  a  doubt,  it  is  the  edifice  which 

iSee  "Ancient  Monarchies,"  vol.  ii.,  pp.  521-523. 


76  BAB  YL ON  AND  EGYPT, 

Herodotus  describes  as  follows : — "  In  the  other 
division  of  the  town  was  the  sacred  precinct  of  Jupiter 
Belus,  a  square  enclosure  two  stades  each  way,  with 
gates  of  solid  brass ;  which  was  also  remaining  in  my 
time.  In  the  middle  of  the  precinct  there  was  a  tower 
of  solid  masonry,  a  stade  both  in  length  and  in 
breadth,  upon  which  was  raised  a  second  tower,  and 
upon  that  a  third,  and  so  on  up  to  eight.  The  ascent 
to  the  top  is  on  the  outside,  by  a  path  which  winds 
round  all  the  towers.  When  one  is  about  half-way 
up,  one  finds  a  resting-place  and  seats,  where  persons 
are  wont  to  sit  some  time  on  their  way  to  the  summit. 
On  the  topmost  tower  there  is  a  spacious  temple,  and 
inside  the  temple  stands  a  couch  of  unusual  size, 
richly  adorned,  with  a  golden  table  by  its  side.  The 
temple  contains  no  image." '  Herodotus  adds : 
"  Below,  in  the  same  precinct,  there  is  a  second  temple, 
in  which  is  a  sitting  figure  of  Jupiter,  all  of  gold. 
Before  the  figure  stands  a  large  golden  table ;  and  the 
throne  whereon  it  sits,  and  the  base  on  which  the 
throne  is  placed,  are  likewise  of  gold.  The  Chaldeans 
told  me  that  all  the  gold  together  was  eight  hundred 
talents  in  weight.  Outside  this  temple  are  two  altars, 
one  of  solid  gold,  on  which  it  is  only  lawful  to  offer 
sucklings  ;  the  other  a  common  altar,  but  of  great  size, 
on  which  the  full-grown  animals  are  sacrificed."'  ^  The 
lower  temple  has  disappeared,  as  have  the  altars  and  the 
upper  stages  of  the  Great  Temple  tower ;  but  the  massive 
basis  remains,  a  solid  piece  of  brickwork  containing 
1  Herod.,  i.  i8i.  ^jbid.,  i.  183. 


NOTICES  IN  DANIEL.  77 

about  four  millions  of  square  feet,  and  requiring  for  its 
construction  at  least  twelve  millions  of  the  largest  bricks 
made  by  the  Babylonians.  If  the  upper  stages  at  all 
resembled  those  of  the  Great  Temple  of  Borsippa,  the 
bricks  needed  for  the  entire  building  must  have  been 
three  times  as  many. 

The  artificial  reservoir  attached  to  the  new  palace  is 
often  mentioned  in  the  inscriptions  of  Nebuchadnezzar.^ 
It  was  called  the  Yapiir-SJiapu,  and  was  probably  of  an 
oblong-square  shape,  with  sides  protected  by  a  massive 
facing  of  burnt  brick.  If  we  accept  the  identification 
of  its  site  suggested  by  Sir  H.  Rawlinson,^  we  must 
assign  it  a  width  of  about  a  hundred  yards,  and  a 
length  of  nearly  a  mile. 

Among  the  other  marvels  of  Babylon,  according  to 
the  ancient  writers,  were  a  tunnel  and  a  bridge..  The 
tunnel  was  carried  under  the  bed  of  the  Euphrates, 
and  was  an  arched  passage,  lined  throughout  with 
baked  brick  laid  in  bitumen,  the  lining  having  a  thick- 
ness of  twenty  bricks.  The  width  of  the  tunnel  was 
fifteen  feet,  and  its  height,  to  the  spring  of  the  arch, 
twelve  feet.^  The  length  was  about  a  thousand  yards, 
or  considerably  more  than  half  a  mile. 

The  bridge  was  a  structure  composed  of  wood, 
metal,  and  stone.  In  the  bed  of  the  Euphrates  were 
built  a  number  of  strong  stone  piers,  at  the  distance 
of  twelve  feet  apart,  which  presented  to  the  current  a 

1"  Records  of  the  Past,"  vol.  v.,  pp.  125,  126,  130,  etc. 
2  See  the  author's  *'  Herodotus,"  vol.  iii.,  p.  580. 
^Diod.  Sic,  ii.  9. 
7* 


78  BAB  YL  ON  AND  E  G  YPT. 

sharp  angle  that  passed  gradually  into  a  gentle  curve. 
The  stones  were  massive,  and  fastened  together  by 
clamps  of  iron  and  lead.^  From  pier  to  pier  was 
stretched  a  platform  of  wood,  composed  of  cedar  and 
cypress  beams,  together  with  the  stems  of  palms,  each 
platform  being  thirty  feet  in  width.^  The  length  of 
the  bridge,  like  that  of  the  tunnel,  was  a  thousand 
yards. ^ 

We  have  now  to  consider  to  what  extent  these 
various  constructions  may  be  regarded  as  the  work  of 
Nebuchadnezzar,  and  how  far  therefore  he  may  be 
viewed  as  justified  in  his  famous  boast.  First,  then, 
we  have  it  distinctly  stated,  both  by  Berosus  ^  and  by 
himself,^  that  the  new  palace,  which  adjoined  the  old, 
was  completely  and  entirely  built  by  him.  The  same 
is  declared,  both  by  Berosus  ^  and  Abydenus,^  of  the 
"hanging  gardens."  The  former  of  these  statements  is 
confirmed  by  the  fact  that  the  bricks  of  the  Kasr  are, 
one  and  all  of  them,  stamped  with  his  name.  The 
old  palace  he  did  not  build ;  but,  as  he  tells  us,  care- 
fully repaired.^  The  Yapitr-Sliapu  was  also  an  ancient 
construction;  but  he  seems  to  have  excavated  it  afresh, 
and  to  have  executed  the  entire  lining  of  its  banks.^ 
With  respect  to  the  great  Temple  of  Bel-Merodach,  if 
we  may  believe  his  own  account,  it  had  gone  com- 

1  Herod.,  i.  1 86.  ^  djo^.,  Sic,  ii.  8.  ^  jbij^ 

*Ap.  Joseph.,  "Ant.  Jud.,"  x.  ii,  §  I. 

^"  Records  of  the  Past,"  vol.  v.,  pp.  130,  131. 

^Berosus,  1.  s.  c.  '^  Abydenus,  Fr.  9,  stib  JiJt. 

^Sir  H.  Rawlinson  in  the  author's  "  Herodotus,"  vol.  ii.,  p.  588. 

nbid.,  p.  587. 


NOTICES  IN  DANIEL.  79 

pletely  to  ruin  before  his  day,  and  required  a  restoration 
that  was  equivalent  to  a  rebuilding.^  Here,  again,  we 
have  the  confirmation  of  actual  fact,  since  the  inscribed 
bricks  from  the  Babil  mound  bear  in  every  instance 
the  name  and  titles  of  Nebuchadnezzar.  Eight  other 
Babylonian  temples  are  also  declared  in  his  inscriptions 
to  have  been  built  or  rebuilt  by  him.^  But  his  greatest 
work  was  the  reconstruction  of  the  walls.  We  have 
seen  their  enormous  length,  breadth,  and  thickness,  even 
according  to  the  lowest  estimates.  Nebuchadnezzar 
found  them  dismantled  and  decayed — probably  mere 
lines  of  earthen  rampart,  such  as  enclose  great  part  of 
the  ruins  to-day.  He  gave  them  the  dimensions  that 
they  attained — dimensions  that  made  them  one  of  the 
world's  wonders.  It  is  this  which  is  his  great  boast 
in  his  standard  inscription  :  *'  Imgar-Bel  and  Nimiti- 
Bel,  the  great  double  wall  of  Babylon,  I  built. 
Buttresses  for  the  embankment  of  its  ditch  I  completed. 
Two  long  embankments  with  cement  and  brick  I  made, 
and  with  the  embankment  which  my  father  had  made 
I  joined  them.  I  strengthened  the  city.  Across  the 
river,  westward,  I  built  the  wall  of  Babylon  with 
brick." ^  And  again,  "The  walls  of  the  fortress  of 
Babylon,  its  defence  in  war,  I  raised ;  and  the  circuit 
of  the  city  of  Babylon  I  have  strengthened  skillfully."^ 
Nebuchadnezzar,  it  may  be  further  remarked,  did 
not  confine  his  constructive  efforts  to  Babylon.     Aby- 

1 "  Records  of  the  Past,"  vol.  v.,  p.  119.  2  j^jj^  pp   ^^2,  123. 

^Ibid.,  p.  125.     Compare  the  author's  "Herodotus,"  vol.  ii.,  p.  587. 
*"  Records  of  the  Past,"  vol.  v.,  pp.  133,  134. 


8o  BAB  YL  ON  AND  E  G  YPT. 

denus  tells  us,  that,  besides  his  great  works  at  the 
capital,  he  excavated  two  large  canals,  the  Nahr-Agane 
and  the  Nahr-Malcha ;  ^  the  latter  of  which  is  known 
from  later  writers  to  have  been  a  broad  and  deep 
channel  connecting  the  Tigris  with  the  Euphrates. 
He  also,  according  to  Abydenus,  dug  a  huge  reservoir 
near  Sippara,  which  was  one  hundred  and  forty  miles 
in  circumference,  and  one  hundred  and  eighty  feet 
deep,  furnishing  it  with  flood-gates,  through  which 
the  water  could  be  drawn  off  for  purposes  of  irri- 
gation, Abydenus  adds,  that  he  built  quays  and 
break-waters  along  the  shores  of  the  Persian  Gulf, 
and  at  the  same  time  founded  the  city  of  Teredon, 
on  the  sea  coast,  as  a  defence  against  the  incursions 
of  the  Arabs. 

The  inscribed  bricks  of  this  great  monarch  show  a  still 
more  inexhaustible  activity.  They  indicate  him  as  the 
complete  restorer  of  the  temple  of  Nebo  at  Borsippa,^ 
the  mightiest  of  all  the  ruins  in  Mesopotamia,  by  some 
identified  with  the  biblical  "  tower  of  Babel."  They 
are  widely  spread  over  the  entire  country,  occurring  at 
Sippara,  at  Cutha,  at  Kal-wadha  (Chilmad  ?),  in  the 
vicinity  of  Baghdad,  and  at  scores  of  other  sites.  It  is  a 
calculation  of  Sir  Henry  Rawlinson's,  that  nine-tenths 
of  the  bricks  brought  from  Mesopotamia  are  inscribed 
with  the  name  of  Nebuchadnezzar,  the  son  of  Nabo- 
polassar.  "  At  least  a  hundred  sites,"  says  the  same 
writer,  "  in  the  tract  immediately  about  Babylon,  give 

^  Abydenus,  1.  s.  c. 

2  Compare  his  inscription,  "  Records  of  the  Past,"  vol.  vii.,  pp.  75-78. 


NOTICES  IN  DANIEL.  8i 

evidence,  by  bricks  bearing  his  legend,  of  the  marvellous 
activity  and  energy  of  this  king."  ^ 

His  inscriptions  add,  that,  besides  the  great  temple 
of  Nebo,  or  of  the  Seven  Spheres,  at  Borsippa,  he 
built  there  at  least  five  others,^  together  with  a  temple 
to  the  Moon-god  at  Beth-Ziba,^  and  one  to  the  Sun- 
god  at  Larsa,  or  Senkareh."*  Altogether  there  is 
reason  to  believe  that  he  was  one  of  the  most  indefati- 
gable of  all  the  builders  that  have  left  their  mark  upon 
the  world  in  which  we  live.  He  covered  Babylonia  with 
great  works.  He  was  the  Augustus  of  Babylon.  He 
found  it  a  perishing  city  of  unbaked  clay  ;  he  left  it 
one  of  durable  burnt  brick,  unless  it  had  been  for 
human  violence,  capable  of  continuing,  as  the  fragment 
of  the  Kasr  has  continued,  to  the  present  day. 

1  "Commentary  on  the  Inscriptions  of  Babylonia  and  Assyria,"  p.  76. 
'"Records  of  the  Past,"  vol.  v.,  p.  123. 

'Ibid,,  p.  124.  *Ibid.,  vol.  vii.,  pp.  71,  72. 

6 


CHAPTER  VII. 

NOTICES    OF   BABYLON    IN    JEREMIAH  AND  EZEKIEL. 

The  Books  of  Jeremiah  and  Ezekiel  contain  numerous 
allusions,  some  prophetic,  others  historic,  to  the  wars 
in  which  Nebuchadnezzar  was  engaged,  or  was  to  be 
engaged.  A  certain  number  of  these  notices  refer  to 
wars,  which  are  also  mentioned  in  Chronicles  or 
Kings,  and  which  have  consequently  already  engaged 
our  attention.^  But  others  touch  upon  campaigns 
which  Kings  and  Chronicles  ignore,  either  on  account 
of  their  lying  outside  the  geographic  range  of  the 
writer's  vision,  or  from  their  being  subsequent  in  point 
of  time  to  the  event  which  they  view  as  constituting 
the  close  of  their  narratives.  The  campaigns  in 
question  are  especially  those  against  Tyre  and  Egypt, 
which  are  touched  by  both  writers,  but  most  emphat- 
ically dwelt  upon  by  Ezekiel. 

I.  The  war  against  Tyre.  Ezekiel's  description  of 
this  war  is  as  follows  : — 

'*  Thus  saith  the  Lord  God  ;  Behold,  I  will  bring  upon  Tyrus  Nebu- 
chadrezzar, king  of  Babylon,  a  king  of  kings,  from  the  north,  with 
horses  and  with  chariots,  and  with  horsemen,  and  companies,  and  much 

^  See  above,  ch.  iii. 
82 


NOTICES  IN  JEREMIAH  AND  EZEKIEL.  83 

people.  He  shall  slay  with  the  sword  thy  daughters  in  the  field  ;  and 
he  shall  make  a  fort  against  thee,  and  cast  a  mount  against  thee,  and  lift 
up  the  buckler  against  thee.  And  he  shall  set  engines  of  war  against 
thy  walls,  and  with  his  axes  he  shall  break  down  thy  towers.  By  reason 
of  the  abundance  of  his  horses,  their  dust  shall  cover  thee ;  thy  walls 
shall  shake  at  the  noise  of  the  horsemen,  and  of  the  wheels,  and  of  the 
chariots,  when  he  shall  enter  into  thy  gates,  as  men  enter  into  a  city 
wherein  is  made  a  breach.  With  the  hoofs  of  his  horses  shall  he  tread 
down  all  thy  streets :  he  shall  slay  thy  people  by  the  sword,  and  thy 
strong  ganisons  shall  go  down  to  the  ground.  And  they  shall  make  a 
spoil  of  thy  riches  and  make  a  prey  of  thy  merchandise ;  and  they  shall 
break  down  thy  walls,  and  destroy  thy  pleasant  houses ;  and  they  shall 
lay  thy  stones,  and  thy  timber  and  thy  dust  in  the  midst  of  the  water. 
And  I  will  cause  the  noise  of  thy  songs  to  cease ;  and  the  sound  of  thy 
harjD  shall  be  no  more  heard.  And  I  will  make  thee  like  the  top  of  a 
rock ;  thou  shalt  be  a  place  to  spread  nets  upon ;  thou  shalt  be  built  no 
more,  for  I,  the  L'ord,  have  spoken  it,  saith  the  Lord  God." — Ezek.  xxvi. 
7-14. 

It  is  evident,  from  the  entire  character  of  the  descrip- 
tion, that  the  city  attacked  is — mainly,  at  any  rate — 
not  the  island  Tyre,  but  the  ancient  city  upon  the 
continent,  Palaetyrus,  as  the  Greeks  called  it,  which 
occupied  a  position  directly  opposite  to  the  island, 
upon  the  sea-shore.  Nebuchadrezzar,  as  he  is  correctly 
named,^  fully  established  in  his  empire,  not  merely  a 
"  king  of  Babylon,"  but  a  "  king  of  kings,"  comes  with 
such  an  army  as  Polyhistor  described  him  as  bringing 
against  Judaea,^  to  attack  the  Phoenician  town.  He 
brings  "  horses  and  chariots,  and  horsemen  and  com- 
panies, and  much  people."     Polyhistor  gives  him,  on 

*  Nebuchadrezzar  exactly  corresponds  to  the  Nabu-kudurri-uzur  of 
the  inscriptions. 

2  Alex.  Polyhist.,  Fr.  24. 


84  BAB  YL  ON  AND  E  G  YPT. 

the  former  occasion,  ten  thousand  chariots,  one 
hundred  and  twenty  thousand  horsemen,  and  one 
hundred  and  eighty  thousand  footmen.  He  proceeds 
to  invest  the  city  after  the  fashion  commonly  adopted 
by  the  Assyrian  monarchs,  and  inherited  from  them 
by  the  Babylonians.  Having  constructed  a  movable 
fort  or  tower,  such  as  we  see  in  the  Assyrian  bas- 
reliefs,^  he  brings  it  against  the  walls,  while  at  the  same 
time  he  "  raises  a  mount  "  against  them,  from  which  to 
work  his  engines  and  shoot  his  arrows  with  the  better 
effect.^  His  men  "  lift  up  the  buckler,"  as  the  Assy- 
rians do  while  they  mine  the  walls  or  fire  the  gates ; 
while  his  '*  engines  "  ply  their  strokes,  and  his  bravest 
soldiers,  "with  axes,"  or  rather  "  swords" — often  used 
by  the  Assyrians  for  the  purpose^ — seek  to  "break 
down  the  towers."  His  efforts  are  successful,  and  a 
breach  is  made;  the  horsemen  and  chariots,  as  well  as 
the  footmen,  enter  the  town  ;  there  is  the  usual  carnage 
and  plundering  that  accompany  the  storming  of  a 
stronghold ;  and,  finally,  there  is  a  destruction  or  dis- 
mantling of  the  place,  more  or  less  complete. 

It  is  remarkable  that  the  siege  and  capture  of  the 
island  city  obtain  no  distinct  mention.  Some  have 
supposed  that  it  was  not  taken  ;  but  this  is  scarcely 
compatible  with  the  words  of  the  "  Lament  for  Tyre," 
or  with  the  "  isles  shaking  at  the  sound  of  her  fall " 
(Ezek.  xxvi.  15,  18).  Probably  the  two  cities  were  so 
bound  together  that  the  conquest  of  the  one  involved 

^  "Ancient  Monarchies,"  vol.  i.,  p.  471. 

2  Ibid.,  p.  473.  nbid. 


NOTICES  IN  JEREMIAH  AND  EZEKIEL.  85 

the  surrender  of  the  other,  and  Nebuchadnezzar, 
master  of  the  Old  Tyre,  experienced  no  resistance 
from  the  New. 

The  annaHsts  of  Tyre,  though  httle  disposed  to 
dwell  upon  a  passage  of  history  so  painful  to  patriotic 
men,  were  forced  to  admit  the  fact  of  the  siege  by 
Nebuchadnezzar,  and  even  to  give  some  account  of  it. 
They  stated  that  it  took  place  in  the  reign  of  a  certain 
Ithobalus  (Eth-Baal),  and  that  the  Tyrians  offered  a 
resistance  almost  without  a  parallel.  They  were 
besieged  continuously  for  thirteen  years.^  The  brief 
extracts  from  their  works,  which  are  all  that  we  possess 
of  them,  do  not  say  whether  the  siege  was  successful 
or  the  contrary ;  but  it  is  scarcely  conceivable  that  the 
great  monarch  would  have  allowed  his  efforts  to  be 
baffled,  and  it  is  certain  that  he  carried  a  large  number 
of  Phoenician  captives  to  Babylonia,  whom  he  settled 
in  various  parts  of  the  country.^ 

The  fact  of  Nebuchadnezzar's  siege  of  Tyre  having 
lasted  thirteen  years,  throws  considerable  light  on 
another  passage  of  Ezekiel.  In  the  twenty-seventh 
year  of  the  captivity  of  Jehoiachin  (b.c.  573),  the  word 
of  the  Lord  came  to  Ezekiel,  saying  : — 

"  Son  of  man,  Nebuchadrezzar,  king  of  Babylon,  caused  his  army  to 
serve  a  great  service  against  Tyrus ;  eve)y  head  was  made  bald,  and 
every  shoulder  was  peeled;  yet  had  he  no  wages,  nor  his  army,  for 
Tyms,  for  the  service  that  he  had  served  against  it.     Therefore  thus  saith 

iMenand.  Ephes.  ap.  Joseph.  Contr.  Ap.  i.  21 ;  Philostrat.  ap.  Joseph. 
Ant.Jud.,  X.  II,  §  I. 

^Berosus  ap.  Joseph,  Ant.  Jiid.,  1.  s.  c. 
8 


86  BAB  YL  ON  AND  L  C  YP  T. 

the  Lord  God  :  Behold,  I  will  give  the  land  of  Egypt  unto  Nebuchad- 
rezzar, king  of  Babylon  j  and  he  shall  take  her  multitude,  and  take  her 
spoil,  and  take  her  prey ;  and  it  shall  be  the  wages  for  his  army.  I 
have  given  him  the  land  of  Egypt  for  his  labour  wherewith  he  served 
against  it,  because  they  wrought  for  Me,  saith  the  Lord  God." — Ezek. 
xxix.  18-20. 

The  extraordinary  length  of  the  siege,  in  which  men 
grew  old  and  wore  themselves  out,  explains  the 
phrase, — '*  Every  head  was  made  bald,  and  every 
shoulder  was  peeled ; "  and  at  the  same  time  accounts 
for  the  fact  that  Nebuchadnezzar  was  considered  to 
have  received  no  wages,  i.e.,  no  sufficient  wages,  for  his 
service,  which  had  been  very  inadequately  repaid  by 
the  plunder  found  in  the  exhausted  city. 

11.  A  great  campaign  in  Egypt.  In  the  year  of  the 
destruction  of  Jerusalem,  Jeremiah  prophesied  as  fol- 
lows : — 

"  Then  came  the  Word  of  the  Lord  unto  Jeremiah  in  Tahpanhes, 
saying.  Take  great  stones  in  thine  hand,  and  hide  them  in  the  clay  in  the 
brick-kiln,  which  is  at  the  entry  of  Pharaoh's  house  in  Tahpanhes,  in 
the  sight  of  the  men  of  Judah ;  and  say  unto  them.  Thus  saith  the  Lord 
of  hosts,  the  God  of  Israel :  Behold,  I  will  send  and  take  Nebuchad- 
rezzar the  king  of  Babylon,  my  servant,  and  will  set  his  throne  upon 
these  stones  that  I  have  hid,  and  he  shall  spread  his  royal  pavilion  over 
them.  And  when  he  cometh,  he  shall  smite  the  land  of  Egypt,  and 
deliver  such  as  are  for  death  to  death ;  and  such  as  are  for  captivity  to 
captivity ;  and  such  as  are  for  the  sword  to  the  sword.  And  I  will 
kindle  a  fire  in  the  houses  of  the  gods  of  Egypt,  and  he  shall 'burn  them, 
and  carry  them  away  captives  :  and  he  shall  array  himself  with  the  land 
of  Egypt,  as  a  shepherd  putteth  on  his  garment ;  and  he  shall  go  forth 
from  thence  in  peace.  He  shall  break  also  the  images  of  Beth-shemesh, 
that  is  in  the  land  of  Egypt ;  and  the  houses  of  the  gods  of  the  Egyptians 
shall  he  burn  with  fire." — ^Jer.  xliii.  8-13. 


NOTICES  IN  JEREMIAH  AND  EZEKIEL.  87 

Some  time  afterwards  he  delivered  another  prophecy 
(xlvi.  13-26)  equally  explicit,  in  which  Migdol,  Noph 
(Memphis),  Tahpanhes  (Daphnae),  and  No-Ammon 
(Thebes)  were  threatened;  and  the  delivery  of  the 
entire  country  and  people  into  the  hand  of  Nebuchad- 
rezzar, king  of  Babylon,  and  into  the  hand  of  his 
servants,  was  foretold. 

Ezekiel  delivered  seven  prophecies  against  Egypt, 
all  of  them  having  more  or  less  reference  to  Babylon 
as  the  power  which  was  to  bring  ruin  upon  the  country, 
and  two  of  them  mentioning  Nebuchadrezzar  by  name, 
as  the  monarch  who  was  to  inflict  the  chastisement 
(Ezek.  xxix.  18,  19;  xxx.  10).  These  prophecies  are 
too  long  to  quote  in  full.  They  are  chiefly  remarkable 
as  declaring  the  complete  desolation  of  Egypt,  and  as 
fixing  a  term  of  years  during  which  her  degradation 
should  continue.  In  chap.  xxx.  we  find  among  the 
places  which  are  to  suffer,  Sin  or  Pelusium,  Zoan  or 
Tanis,  On  or  Heliopolis,  Noph  or  Memphis,  Tahpanhes 
or  Daphnae,  Pibeseth  or  Bubastis,  and  No-Ammon  or 
Thebes.  In  chap.  xxix.  an  even  wider  area  is  included. 
There  we  are  told  that  the  land  of  Egypt  was  to  be 
"  utterly  waste  and  desolate  from  Migdol  to  Syene,^ 
even  unto  the  border  of  Ethiopia"  (ver.  10).  The 
time  of  Egypt's  affliction  is  fixed  at  "  forty  years  " 
(vers.  11-13),  after  which  it  is  to  recover,  but  to  be  a 
''  base  kingdom,"  "  the  basest  of  the  kingdoms  "  (ver. 

^  There  is  no  doubt  that  this  is  the  proper  rendering.  "  From  the 
tower  of  Syene  even  unto  the  border  of  Ethiopia"  would  have  no 
meaning,  since  Syene  bordered  on  Ethiopia. 


BAB  YL  ON  AND  EG  YPT. 


15),  no  more  "exalted  above  the  nations,"  no  more  a 
ruler  over  nations  external  to  itself. 

By  the  date  of  one  of  Ezekiel's  prophecies  (chap. 
xxix.  17-20),  which  is  B.C.  573,  it  is  evident  that  the 
great  invasion  prophesied  had  not  then  taken  place, 
but  was  still  impending.  Nebuchadnezzar's  attack 
must  consequently  be  looked  for  towards  the  latter 
part  of  his  long  reign,  which  terminated  in  B.C.  562, 
according  to  the  Canon  of  Ptolemy. 

Until  recently  it  would  have  been  impossible  to 
adduce  any  historical  confirmation,  or  indeed  illustra- 
tion, of  these  prophecies.  They  were  quoted  by 
sceptical  writers  as  prophecies  that  had  been  unfulfilled. 
Herodotus,  it  was  remarked,  knew  nothing  of  any 
invasion  of  Egypt  by  the  Asiatics  during  the  reigns  of 
either  Apries  or  Amasis,  with  whom  Nebuchadnezzar 
was  contemporary,  much  less  of  any  complete  devasta- 
tion of  the  entire  territoiy  by  them.  It  was  true  that 
Josephus,  anxious  to  save  the  reputation  of  his  sacred 
books,  spoke  of  an  invasion  of  Egypt  by  Nebuchad- 
nezzar later  than  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem,  and 
even  made  him  kill  one  king  and  set  up  another.^ 
But  he  placed  these  events  in  the  fifth  year  after  the 
fall  of  Jerusalem,  that  is  in  B.C.  581,  whereas  Eze- 
kiel's date,  in  his  twenty-ninth  chapter,  showed  that 
they  had  not  happened  by  B.C.  573.  Moreover,  he 
contradicted  Egyptian  history,  which  gave  no  change 
of  sovereign  till  ten  years  after  the  time  mentioned, 
or  B.C.  571. 

i"Ant.  Jud."  X.  9,  §  7. 


NOTICES  IN  JEREMIAH  AND  EZEKIEL.  89 

It  was  difficult  to  meet  these  objectors  formerly. 
Within  the  last  few  years,  however,  light  has  been 
thrown  on  the  subject  from  two  inscriptions — one 
Egyptian,  which  had  been  long  known,  but  not  rightly 
understood ;  the  other  Babylonian,  which  was  not 
discovered  till  1878.  The  Egyptian  inscription  is  on 
a  statue  in  the  Louvre,  which  was  originally  set  up  at 
Elephantine  by  a  certain  Nes-Hor,  an  official  of  high 
rank  whom  Apries,  the  Egyptian  monarch  called  in 
Scripture  '*  Pharaoh-Hophra, "  had  made  "Governor 
of  the  south."  This  officer,  according  to  the  latest 
and  best  interpretation  of  his  inscription,^  writes  as 
follows  : — '*  I  have  caused  to  be  made  ready  my  statue  ; 
my  name  will  be  perpetuated  by  means  of  it ;  it  will 
not  perish  in  this  temple,  inasmuch  as  I  took  care  of 
the  house,  when  it  was  injured  by  the  foreign  hordes 
of  the  Syrians,  the  people  of  the  north,  the  Asiatics, 
and  the  profane  [who  intended  evil]  in  their  heart ;  for 
it  lay  in  their  heart  to  rise  up,  to  bring  into  subjection 
the  upper  country.  But  the  fear  of  thy  majesty  was 
upon  them ;  they  gave  up  what  their  heart  had 
planned.  I  did  not  let  them  advance  to  Konosso,  but 
I  let  them  approach  the  place  where  thy  majesty  was. 
Then  thy  majesty  made  an  [expedition]  against  them." 

It  results  from  this  inscription,  that,  while  Apries 
was  still  upon  the  throne,  there  was  an  invasion  of 
Egypt  from  the  north.  A  host  of  Asiatics,  whom  the 
writer  calls  Amii,  i.e.  Syrians,  or,  at  any  rate,  Semites 

^  See  Dr.  Wiedemann's  paper  in  the  "  Zeitschrift  fiir  ^gypt.  Sprache  " 
for  1878,  p.  4. 
8* 


90  BAB YL ON  AND  EGYPT. 

from  the  direction  of  Syria,  poured  into  the  country, 
and,  carrying  all  before  them,  advanced  up  the  valley 
of  the  Nile,  threatening  the  subjection  of  the  '*  upper 
country."  Memphis  and  Thebes  must  have  fallen, 
since  the  invaders  reached  Elephantine.  Apparently 
they  were  bent  on  subduing,  not  only  Egypt,  but 
Ethiopia.  But  Nes-Hor  checked  their  advance,  he 
prevented  them  from  proceeding  further,  he  even 
forced  them  to  fall  back  towards  the  north,  and  brought 
them  into  contact  with  an  army  which  Apries  had 
collected  against  them.  The  result  of  the  contact  is 
not  mentioned;  but  the  invaders  must  have  retired, 
since  Nes-Hor  is  able  to  embellish  and  repair  the  great 
temple  of  Kneph,  which  they  have  injured,  and  to  set 
up  his  statue  in  it. 

The  other  inscription  is,  unfortunately,  very  frag- 
mentary. The  tablet  on  which  it  was  written  was  of 
small  size,  and  allowed  space  for  only  thirty — not  very 
long — lines.  All  the  lines  are  more  or  less  mutilated. 
Of  the  first  and  second  one  word  only  remains ;  of  the 
twenty-fifth  and  twenty-eighth,  only  one  letter.  The 
twenty-ninth  is  wholly  obliterated.  The  termination 
alone  remains  of  the  last  seven.  Some  lacunae  occur 
in  all  the  others.  Still,  the  general  purport  is  plain. 
Nebuchadnezzar  addresses  Merodach,  and  says, — "  My 
enemies  thou  usedst  to  destroy ;  thou  caus'edst  my 
heart  to  rejoice  ...  in  those  days  thou  madest  my 
hands  to  capture ;  thou  gavest  me  ^  rest ;  .  .  .  thou 
causedst  me  to  construct ;  my  kingdom  thou  madest 
to  increase.  .  .  .     Over  them  kings  thou    exaltedst; 


NOTICES  IN  JEREMIAH  AND  EZEKIEL.  91 

his  warriors,  his  princes,  his  paths,  Hke  ...  he  made 
...  to  his  army  he  trusted  ...  he  hastened  before 
the  great  gods.  [In  the]  thirty-seventh  year  of 
Nebuchadnezzar  king  of  the  country  [of  Babylon, 
Nebuchadnezzar]  to  Egypt  to  make  war  went.  [His 
army  Ama]sis,  king  of  Egypt,  collected,  and  .  .  .  [his 
soldiers]  went,  they  spread  abroad.  As  for  me  (?) 
....  a  remote  district,  which  is  in  the  middle  of  the 
sea  ....  many  .  .  .  from  the  midst  of  the  country 
of  Egypt  ....  soldiers,  horses,  and  chariots  (?)... 
for  his  help  he  assembled  and  ...  he  looked  before 
him  ....  to  his  [army]  he  trusted  and  .  .  .  fixed  a 
command."^ 

Nebuchadnezzar,  evidently,  in  this  inscription,  speaks 
of  an  expedition  which  he  personally  conducted  into 
Egypt,  as  late  as  his  thirty-seventh  year,  which  was 
B.C.  568,  five  years  later  than  the  date  of  Ezekiel's 
dated  prophecy.  The  king,  however,  against  whom 
he  made  war,  was  not  Apries,  whose  name  in  Egyptian 
was  Ua-ap-ra,  but  apparently  Amasis,  his  successor, 
since  it  ended  in  -su,  probably  in  -asu?  This  may  seem 
to  be  an  objection  against  referring  the  two  inscriptions 
to  the  same  events,  since  Apries  was  still  king  when 
that  of  Nes-Hor  was  set  up.  But  a  reference  to 
Egyptian  history  removes  this  difficulty.  Amasis,  it 
appears,  ascended  the  throne  in  B.C.  571  ;  but  Apries 

^"Transactions  of  Society  of  Biblical  Archaeology,"  vol.  vii.,  pp. 
218-222. 

^  See  the  inscription  in  the  "Transactions  of  Bibl.  Arch.  Soc,"  vol. 
vii.,  p.  220,  reverse,  line  i. 


92  BAB YL ON  AND  EGYPT. 

did  not  die  until  b.  c.  565.  For  six  years  the  two 
monarchs  inhabited  the  same  palace  at  Sais/  and  both 
bore  the  royal  title.  An  Egyptian  monument  distinctly 
recognizes  the  double  reign  ;^  the  expedition  of  Nebu- 
chadnezzar, being  in  B.C.  568,  exactly  falls  into  this 
interval.  It  was  natural  that  Nebuchadnezzar  should 
mention  the  active  young  king,  who  had  the  real 
power,  and  was  his  actual  antagonist ;  it  was  equally 
natural  that  Nes-Hor,  an  old  employe  under  Apries, 
should  ignore  the  upstart,  and  seek  to  do  honour  to 
his  old  master. 

Other  wars  of  Nebuchadnezzar  are  thought  to  be 
glanced  at  in  Scripture,  as  one  with  Elam,^  to  which 
there  may  be  allusion  in  Jer.  xlix.  34-38,  and  Ezek. 
xxxii.  24 ;  one  with  the  Moabites,  perhaps  in  Ezek. 
XXV.  8-1 1  ;  and  one  with  Ammon,  touched  upon  in 
Ezek.  xxi.  20,  28-32,  and  xxv:  4-7.  Josephus  relates 
it  as  a  historical  fact,  that  he  reduced  both  the  Moabites 
and  the  Ammonites  to  subjection  ;^  and  there  are  some 
grounds  for  thinking  that  he  also  made  himself  master 
of  Elam ;  but  it  cannot  be  said  that  these  events  are 
either  confirmed  or  illustrated  by  profane  writers,  who 
make  no  distinct  mention  of  any  of  his  wars,  except 
those  with  the  Jews,  the  Phoenicians,  and  the  Egyptians. 

It  was,  however,  widely  recognized  in  antiquity  that 
Nebuchadnezzar  was  a  great  general.     His  exploits 

1  Herod,  ii.  169. 

2  Champollion,  "Monuments  de  I'Egypte,"  vol.  iv.,  p.  443,  No.  I. 

3  G.  Smith,  "  History  of  Babylonia,"  pp.  157,  158. 
*  Joseph.,  "Ant.  Jud.,"  x.  9,  g  7. 


NOTICES  IN  JEREMIAH  AND  EZEKIEL.  93 

were  enormously  exaggerated,  since  he  was  believed 
by  some^  to  have  conquered  all  North  Africa  and 
Spain,  as  well  as  the  country  between  Armenia  and 
the  Caspian.  But  there  was  a  basis  of  truth  under- 
lying the  exaggerations.  Nebuchadnezzar,  at  a  com- 
paratively early  age,  defeated  Pharaoh-Necho  at  the 
great  battle  of  Carchemish,  conquered  Coelesyria, 
and  reduced  Judaea  to  vassalage.  Somewhat  later  he 
engaged  in  the  difficult  enterprise  of  capturing  Tyre, 
and  exhibited  a  rare  spirit  of  persistence  and  perse- 
verance in  his  long  siege  of  that  town.  His  capture 
of  Jerusalem,  after  a  siege  of  eighteen  months  (2 
Kings  XXV.  1-4),  was  creditable  to  him,  since  Samaria, 
a  place  of  far  less  strength,  was  not  taken  by  the 
Assyrians  until  it  had  been  besieged  for  three  years 
(2  Kings  xvii.  5).  The  reduction  of  Elam,  if  we  may 
ascribe  it  to  him,  redounds  still  more  to  his  honour, 
since  the  Elamites  were  a  numerous  and  powerful 
nation,  which  had  contended  on  almost  even  terms 
with  the  Assyrians  from  the  time  of  Sargon  to  the 
close  of  the  empire.  The  judgment  of  a  good  gen- 
eral  was  shown  in  the  subjugation  of  Moab  and 
Ammon,  for  it  is  essential  to  the  security  of  Syria  and 
Palestine  that  the  tribes  occupying  the  skirt  of  the 
great  eastern  desert  shall  be  controlled  and  their 
ravages  prevented.  In  Egypt  Nebuchadnezzar  prob- 
ably met  his  most  powerful  adversary,  since  under 
the  rule  of  the  Psammetichi  Egypt  had  recovered 
almost  her  pristine  vigour.  Thus  in  this  quarter  the 
^  As  Megasthenes  and  Abydenus. 


94  BAB  YLON  AND  EG  YPT. 

struggle  for  supremacy  was  severe  and  greatly  pro- 
longed. He  contended  with  three  successive  Egyptian 
kings — Necho,  Apries  or  Hophra,  and  Amasis.  From 
Necho  he  took  the  whole  tract  between  Carchemish 
and  the  Egyptian  frontier.  Apries  feared  to  meet  him, 
and,  after  a  futile  demonstration,  gave  up  the  interfer- 
ence which  he  had  meditated  (Jer.  xxxvii.  7).  Amasis, 
who  had  perhaps  provoked  him  by  his  expedition 
against  Cyprus,^  which  Nebuchadnezzar  would  natu- 
rally regard  as  his,  he  signally  punished  by  ravaging 
his  whole  territory,  injuring  the  temples,  destroying 
or  carrying  off  the  images  of  the  gods,  and  making 
prisoners  of  many  of  the  inhabitants.  It  is  possible 
that  he  did  more  than  this.  Egypt's  degradation  was 
to  last  for  a  long  term  of  years.^  It  is  not  unlikely 
that  Amasis  became  the  vassal  of  Nebuchadnezzar, 
and  his  peaceful  reign,  and  the  material  prosperity  of 
his  country,^  were  the  result  of  a  compact  by  which 
he  acknowledged  the  suzerainty  of  Babylon,  and 
bowed  his  head  to  a  foreign  yoke. 

1  Herod,  ii.  182. 

2 "Forty  years"  (Ezek.  xxix.  11-13);  but  "forty  years,"  in  prophetic 
language,  is  not  to  be  taken  literally. 
3  Herod,  ii.  177. 


CHAPTER    VIII. 

FURTHER    NOTICES    OF    BABYLON    IN    EZEKIEL. 
"A  land  of  traffick  ...  a  city  of  merchants." — Ezek.  xvii.  4. 

This  allusion  to  the  commercial  character  of  Babylon 
does  not  stand  alone  and  unsupported  in  Scripture. 
Isaiah  speaks  of  the  Babylonian  "merchants"  (Isa. 
xlvii.  15),  and  describes  the  Chaldaeans  as  persons 
"whose  cry  is  in  their  ships"  (chap,  xliii.  14).  Ezekiel 
mentions  Canneh  (Calneh),  and  Chilmad,  Babylonian 
towns,  among  the  places  that  carried  on  commercial 
dealings  with  Tyre  (Ezek.  xxvii.  23).  In  the  Revela- 
tion of  St.  John  the  Divine,  Babylon  is  made  the  type 
of  a  city,  which  is  represented  as  eminently  commer- 
cial, as  dealing  in  the  "merchandise  of  gold,  and 
silver,  and  precious  stones,  and  of  pearls,  and  fine 
linen,  and  purple,  and  silk,  and  scarlet,  and  all  thyine 
wood,  and  all  manner  vessels  of  ivory,  and  all  manner 
vessels  of  most  precious  wood,  and  of  brass,  and  iron, 
and  marble,  and  cinnamon,  and  odours,  and  ointments, 
and  frankincense,  and  wine,  and  oil,  and  fine  flour,  and 
wheat,  and  beasts,  and  sheep,  and  horses,  and  chariots, 
and  slaves,  and  the  souls  of  men"  (Rev.  xviii.  12,  13). 

95 


96  BABYLON  AND  EG  YP T. 

The  object  of  the  present  chapter  will  be  to  show 
that  the  notices  of  Babylon  in  profane  writers  and  in 
the  inscriptions  fully  bear  out  the  character  thus 
assigned  to  her,  showing  that  she  was  the  centre  of  an 
enormous  land  and  sea  commerce,  which  must  have 
given  occupation  to  thousands  of  merchants,  and  have 
necessitated  the  employment  of  numerous  ships. 

Nothing  is  more  evident  in  the  Babylonian  inscrip- 
tions, and  also  in  those  of  Assyria  which  treat  of 
Babylonian  affairs,  than  the  large  amount  of  curious 
woods,  and  the  quantity  of  alabaster  and  other  stone, 
which  was  employed  in  the  great  constructions  of  the 
Babylonians,  and  which  must  necessarily  have  been 
imported  from  foreign  countries.  Babylonia  being 
entirely  alluvial  is  wholly  destitute  of  stone,  and  the 
only  trees  of  any  size  that  it  produces  are  the  cypress 
and  the  palm.^  We  find  the  Babylonian  monarchs 
employing  in  their  temples  and  palaces  abundant  pine 
and  cedar  trees,  together  with  many  other  kinds  of 
wood,  which  it  is  impossible  to  identify.  Mention  is 
made  of  '' Babil-v^ ood,''  '' iimritgaiia-vjood,''  '' uinma- 
ka7ia-\NOo6.,''  "r/-wood,"  ''  ikki-v^ood,'' '' surinan-\NOod,'' 
'' asuhu-wood,''  '' imisritkamia-^NOod','  and  '' incsiikan- 
wood."^  Modern  exploration  has  shown  that  among 
the  building  materials  employed  was  teak,^  but  whether 
any  one  of  these  obscure  names  designates  that  species 
of  timber  is  uncertain.     What  seems  plain  is  that  all 

1  See  the  author's  "Ancient  Monarchies,"  vol.  iii.,  pp.  36,  38. 

2  "Records  of  the  Past,"  vol.  v.,  pp.  117-1335  ^'ol-  ^'^^•■>  P-  75- 

3  "Journal  of  the  R.  Asiat.  Society,"  vol.  xv.,  p.  264. 


NOTICES  IN  EZEKIEL.  97 

these  woods  must  have  been  imported.  The  teak 
must  have  come  either  from  India,  or  possibly  from 
one  of  the  islands  in  the  Persian  Gulf;^  there  is 
evidence  that  the  cedars  and  pines,  together  with 
the  Babil-wood,  were  imported  from  Syria,  being 
furnished  by  the  forests  that  clothed  the  sides 
of  Mounts  Libanus  and  Amanus;^  there  is  no 
evidence  with  respect  to  the  remainder,  but  they 
may  have  been  derived  from  either  Armenia,  Assyria, 
or  Susiana. 

Among  the  kinds  of  stone  commonly  used  in  build- 
ing which  must  necessarily  have  been  imported,  were 
"alabaster  blocks,"  '' zamat  stone,"  '' durmina-turda 
and  kamina-tiirda  stone,  zamat-Jiati  stone,  and  lapis 
lazuli."^  Xenophon  speaks  of  the  importation  of 
"millstones"  in  his  own  day;^  and,  as  Babylonia 
could  not  furnish  them,  they  must  always  have  come 
in  from  without.  Sandstone  and  basalt,  which  are 
found  in  some  of  the  ruins,  could  have  been  obtained 
from  the  adjacent  parts  of  Arabia;  but  the  alabaster, 
which  has  been  also  found,  and  the  lapis  lazuli,  which 
was  especially  affected  for  adornment,  must  have  been 
brought  from  a  greater  distance. 

Stones  of  the  rarer  and  more  precious  kinds  were 
also  largely  imported,  to  serve  either  as  seals  or  as 

1  As  Heeren  thinks,  on  the  strength  of  a  passage  of  Theophrastus 
("As.  Nat.,"  vol   ii.,  pp.  258,  259). 

2 "  Records  of  the  Past,"  vol.  v.,  p.  119;  vol.  ix.,  p.  16;  "Transactions 
of  Bibl.  Arch.  Society,"  vol.  vii.,  p.  154. 

3  "Records  of  the  Past,"  vol.  v., pp.  121, 125-127;  vol.  vii., p.  76, etc, 

*Xen.,  "Anab.,"  i.  5,  ?  5. 
7 


98  BAB YL ON  AND  EGYPT, 

ornaments  of  the  person.  Herodotus  tells  us  that 
"  every  Babylonian  carried  a  seal ;  "  ^  and  the  remains 
tend  to  confirm  his  testimony,  since  Babylonian  seals, 
either  in  the  shape  of  signet  rings  or  of  cylinders, 
exist  by  thousands  in  European  museums,  and  are 
still  found  in  large  numbers  by  explorers.  They  are 
chiefly  made  of  onyx,  jasper,  serpentine,  meteoric 
stone,  lapis  lazuli,  and  chalcedony,  all  substances  that 
must  have  been  introduced  from  abroad,  since  no  one 
of  them  is  produced  by  Babylonia. 

Babylonia  must  also  have  imported,  or  else  carried 
off  from  foreign  countries,  the  whole  of  its  metals. 
Neither  gold,  nor  silver,  nor  copper,  nor  tin,  nor  lead, 
nor  iron  are  among  the  gifts  which  Nature  has  vouch- 
safed to  the  southern  Mesopotamian  region.  No  doubt 
her  military  successes  enabled  her  to  obtain  from  foreign 
lands,  not  by  exchange  but  by  plunder,  considerable 
supplies  of  these  commodities  ;  but  besides  this  acci- 
dental and  irregular  mode  of  acquisition,  there  must 
have  been  some  normal  and  unceasing  source  of 
supply,  to  prevent  disastrous  fluctuations,  and  secure 
a  due  provision  for  the  constant  needs  of  the  country. 
Every  implement  used  in  agriculture  or  in  the 
mechanical  trades  had  to  be  made  of  bronze,^  the 
materials  of  which  came  from  afar;  copper  perhaps 
from  Armenia,  which  still  produces  it  largely,  tin  from 
Further  India,  or  from  Cornwall,  through  the  medium 

*  Herod.,  i.  195. 

2  Iron  was  not  absolutely  unknown  in  ancient  Babylonia;  but  almost 
all  the  weapons  and  implements  found  are  of  bronze. 


NOTICES  IN  EZEKIEL. 


99 


of  the  Phoenicians.^  Every  weapon  of  war  had  to  be 
supplied  similarly;  all  the  gold  and  silver  lavished 
on  the  doors  and  walls  of  temples,^  on  images  of  the 
gods  or  the  dresses  in  which  the  images  were  clothed,^ 
on  temple  tables,  altars,  or  couches,^  on  palace  walls 
and  roofs,^  on  thrones,  sceptres,  parasols,  chariots,  and 
the  like,^  or  on  bracelets,  armlets,  and  other  articles 
of  personal  adornment,  had  to  be  procured  from  some 
foreign  land  and  to  be  conveyed  hundreds  or  thousands 
of  miles  before  the  Babylonians  could  make  use  of 
them. 

Another  whole  class  of  commodities  which  the 
Babylonians  are  believed  to  have  obtained  from  foreign 
countries  comprises  the  raw  materials  for  their  clothes, 
and  for  the  greater  part  of  their  fabrics.^  Babylonia 
was  not  a  country  suitable  for  the  rearing  of  sheep, 
and,  if  it  produced  wool  at  all,  produced  it  only  in 
small  quantities ;  yet  the  Babylonian  wore  ordinarily 
two  woolen  garments,^  and  some  of  their  most  famous 
fabrics  were  of  the  same  material.  Their  other 
clothes  were  either  linen  or  cotton ;  but,  so  far  as  is 
known,  neither  flax  nor  the  cotton  plant  was  cultivated 
by  them. 

Spices   constituted   another   class   of  imports.     In 

^  Herod.,  iii,  115, 

2  "Records  of  the  Past,"  vol.  v.,  pp.  117-120;  vol.  vii.,  p.  75. 

^  Ibid.,  vol.  vii.,  pp.  5,  6. 

*  Herod.,  i.  181,  183  ;  Diod.  Sic,  ii.  9. 

^ "  Records  of  the  Past,"  vol.  v.,  pp.  131,  133. 

®Ibid.,  vol.  ix.,  p.  15. 

^Heeren,  "Asiatic  Nations,"  vol.  ii.,  p.  199.  ^ Herod.,  i.  195. 


BAB  YLON  AND  EG  YPT. 


their  religious  ceremonies  the  Babylonians  consumed 
frankincense  ^  on  an  enormous  scale ;  and  they 
employed  it  likewise  in  purifications.^  They  also 
used  aromatic  reeds  in  their  sacrifices,^  as  did  the  Jews 
who  were  brought  into  contact  with  them.*  Whether 
they  imported  cinnamon  fi-om  Ceylon  or  India,^  may 
perhaps  be  doubted ;  but  the  spices  of  Arabia  were 
certainly  in  request,  and  formed  the  material  of  a 
regular  traffic.^ 

All  the  wine  consumed  in  Babylonia  was  imported 
from  abroad.  Babylonia  was  too  hot,  and  probably 
also  too  moist,  for  the  vine,  which  was  not  cultivated 
in  any  part  of  the  country.^  A  sort  of  spirit  was 
distilled  from  dates,  which  the  Greeks  called  '*  palm- 
wine,"  ^  and  this  was  drunk  by  the  common  people. 
But  the  wealthier  classes  could  be  content  with  nothing 
less  than  the  juice  of  the  grape  ;^  and  hence  there  was 
a  continuous  importation  of  real  wine  into  the  country ,^^ 
where  there  prevailed  a  general  luxuriousness  of  living. 
The  trade  must  consequently  have  been  considerable, 
and  is  not  likely  to  have  been  confined  to  a  single 
channel.  There  were  several  vine-growing  countries 
not  very  remote  from  Babylon ;  and  a  brisk  commerce 
was  in  all  probability  carried  on  with  most  of  them. 

Among  other  probable  imports  may  be  mentioned 

1  Herod.,  i.  183.  2ibid.,  i.  198. 

2 "Records  of  the  Past,"  vol.  vii.,  p.  140.  *  Jer.  vi,  20. 

^  As  Heeren  supposes  ("As.  Nat.,"  vol.  ii.,  p.  240). 
^Strabo,  xvi.  mo.  "  Herod.,  i.  193. 

^Ibid.  »Dan.  i.  5;  v.  i.   .  ^'^  Herod.,  i.  194. 


NOTICES  IN  EZEKIEL. 


ivory  and  ebony,  for  the  construction  of  rich  furniture, 
pearls  for  personal  adornment,  rare  woods  for  walking- 
sticks,  dyes,  Indian  shawls,  musical  instruments,  Phoe- 
nician asses,  Indian  dogs,  and  Persian  greyhounds. 

Ivory  and  ebony  which  were  brought  to  Solomon 
as  early  as  B.C.  looo  (i  Kings  x.  22),  and  which  Tyre 
imported  from  Dedan,  on  the  Persian  Gulf,  in  the  time 
of  Ezekiel  (Ezek.  xxvii.  15),  can  scarcely  have  been 
unknown  to  the  Babylonians,  through  whose  territory 
the  Phoenician  trade  with  Dedan  must  have  passed. 
Pearls,  which  were  worn  by  the  Assyrians,^  and 
supplied  to  Western  Asia  generally  from  the  famous 
fisheries  of  Bahrein  and  Karrak,  in  the  Persian  Gulf,^ 
were  doubtless  as  much  appreciated  by  the  Babylo- 
nians as  by  other  Asiatics ;  and  the  pearl  merchants 
can  scarcely  have  been  permitted  to  carry  their 
precious  wares  into  the  interior  without  leaving  a  fair 
share  of  them  to  the  country  whereto  they  must  have 
brought  them  first  of  all.  Rare  wood  for  walking- 
sticks  is  mentioned  as  grown  in  Tylos,^  another  island 
in  the  Gulf,  and  would  naturally  be  transported  to  the 
neighbouring  country,  where  walking-sticks  were  in 
universal  use.*  The  dyes  which  gave  to  Babylonian 
fabrics  their  brilliant  hues  came  probably  from  India 
or  Kashmir,  and  were  furnished  by  the  Indian  larva  or 
the  cochineal   insect.^     With  their  dyes  the   Indians 

1"  Ancient  Monarchies,"  vol.  i.,  p.  559. 
'^  Heeren,  "  As.  Nat.,"  vol.  ii.,  pp.  235-237. 
^Theophrast.,  "Hist.  Plant.,"  v.  6. 

*  Herod.,  i.  195.  ^ggg  Heeren,  p.  200. 

9* 


I02  BAB YL ON  AND  EGYPT. 

would  probably  send  their  shawls,  an  early  product  of 
Hindoo  industry,  and  one  from  time  immemorial 
highly  valued  in  the  East.^  The  importation  of 
musical  instruments  may  be  regarded  as  proved,  if  we 
allow  any  of  the  names  used  in  Daniel  to  be  derived 
from  the  Greek,  since  the  Greek  name  could  only 
reach  Babylon  together  with  the  instrument  whereto 
it  belonged.  Phoenician  asses  are  expressly  mentioned, 
as  sold  by  one  Babylonian  to  another,  on  one  of  the 
black  contract  stones  found  at  Babylon,^  as  are  "  grey- 
hounds from  the  East,"  which  were  most  probably 
Persian.  A  large  dog,  most  likely  an  Indian  hound, 
is  represented  on  a  tablet  brought  by  Sir  H.  Rawlinson 
from  the  same  site,^  and  the  representation  is  a  fairly 
good  proof  of  the  importation  of  the  animal  portrayed. 
It  is  impossible  for  a  country  to  import  largely 
unless  it  also  exports  largely,  either  its  own  products 
or  those  of  other  regions.  In  the  long  run  exports 
and  imports  must  balance  each  other.  Babylonia 
seems  to  have  exported  chiefly  its  own  manufactures. 
Large  weaving  establishments  existed  in  various  parts 
of  the  country ;  ^  and  fabrics  issued  from  the  Baby- 
lonian looms  which  were  highly  esteemed  by  foreign 
nations.  The  texture  was  exquisite;  the  dyes  were 
of  remarkable  brilliancy ;  and  the  workmanship  was 
superior.  The  "  Babylonish  garment "  found  among 
the  spoils  of  Jericho  when  the  Israelites  entered  the 

^See  Heeren,  p.  209.         2 «  Records  of  the  Past,"  vol.  ix.,  p.  105. 
3  See  the  author's  "  Herodotus,"  vol.  i.,  p.  314. 
*  Strab.,  xvi.,  p.  1074. 


NOTICES  IN  EZEKIEL.  103 

Holy  Land,  and  coveted  by  Achan/  is  an  evidence  at 
once  of  the  high  esteem  in  which  such  fabrics  were 
held,  and  of  the  distance  to  which,  even  thus  early, 
they  had  been  exported.  Fringed  and  striped  robes 
of  seemingly  delicate  material  appear  on  Babylonian 
cylinders  ^  as  early  as  the  Proto-Chaldaean  period,  or 
before  b.  c.  2000.  We  cannot  fix  their  material ;  but 
perhaps  they  were  of  the  class  called  "  sindones," 
which  appear  to  have  been  muslins  of  extreme  fineness, 
and  of  brilliant  hues,  and  which  in  later  times  were  set 
apart  for  royal  use.^ 

The  carpets  of  Babylon  acquired  a  peculiar  reputa- 
tion.^ Carpets  are  one  of  the  principal  objects  of 
luxury  in  the  East,  where  not  only  are  the  floors  of 
the  reception-rooms  in  all  houses  of  a  superior  class 
covered  with  them,  but  they  even  form  the  coverlets 
of  beds,  couches,  divans,  and  sofas,  and  are  thus  the 
main  decoration  of  apartments.  The  carpets  of  Baby- 
lon were  made  of  fine  wool,  skilfully  woven,  exquisite 
in  their  colours,  and  boasting  patterns  that  gave  them 
a  character  of  piquancy  and  originality.  They  bore 
representations  of  griffins  and  other  fabulous  animals,^ 
which  excited  the  wonder  and  admiration  of  foreigners, 
who  did  not  know  whether  they  beheld  mere  freaks 
of  fancy  or  portraits  of  the  wonderful  beasts  of  Lower 
Asia. 

Besides   their   dresses,    carpets,   and    other    textile 

^  Josh.  vii.  21.  2  u  Ancient  Monarchies,"  vol.  i.,  p.  94. 

^Theophrast.,  "Hist.  Plant.,"  iv.  9. 

*  Arrian,  "  Exp.  Alex.,"  vi.  29.  ^  Athen.  Deipn.,  v.,  p.  197. 


I04  BAB  YL  ON  AND  EGYPT. 

fabrics,  it  may  be  suspected  that  Babylonia  exported 
rich  furniture.  When  the  Assyrian  monarchs  invaded 
a  foreign  territory,  and  obtained  any  considerable 
success,  they  almost  universally  carried  off,  on  their 
return  to  their  own  land,  great  part  of  the  furniture  of 
any  royal  palace  that  fell  into  their  hands,  as  the  most 
valued  portion  of  their  booty.  In  their  Babylonian 
expeditions  alone,  however,  do  they  particularize  the 
several  objects.  There  we  find  mention  of  the  golden 
throne,  the  golden  parasol,  the  golden  sceptre,  the 
silver  chariot,"  ^  and  other  articles  that  cannot  be  iden- 
tified. There,  too,  we  find  that  when  a  foreign  prince 
needed  persuading  in  order  to  make  him  render  assist- 
ance, and  a  ''  propitiatory  offering  "  had  to  be  sent  to 
him,  '*  a  throne  in  silver,  a  parasol  in  silver,  2,  pasur  in 
silver,  and  a  ninnaktu  in  silver"  were  the  objects  sent.^ 
It  would  only  have  been  going  a  short  step  further  to 
offer  articles  so  highly  appreciated  to  foreign  customers 
generally. 

It  is  uncertain  whether  the  Babylonians  exported 
grain,  or  dates,  or  any  of  the  other  produce  of  the 
palm.^  Enormous  quantities  of  wheat,  barley,  millet, 
and  sesame  were  raised  in  their  country,'^  while  the 
date  palm  grew  so  thickly  in  the  lower  parts  of  the 
territory  as  to  form  almost  a  continuous  forest.^  The 
natural  wealth  of  the  country  consisted  mainly  in  the 

'  "  Records  of  the  Past,"  vol.  ix.,  p.  15.  2  \\,\^^^  vol.  vii.,  p.  45. 

^  The  palm  was  said  to  furnish  the  Babylonians  with  bread,  wine, 
vinegar,  honey,  groats,  string  and  ropes  of  all  kinds,  and  a  mash  for 
cattle  (Strab.,  xvi.  I,  \  14). 

*  Herod.,  i.  193.  *  Amm.  Marc,  xxiv.  3. 


NOTICES  IN  EZEKIEL.  105 

abundance  of  these  products,  and  it  is  scarcely  pos- 
sible that  use  was  not  made  of  the  overplus  beyond  the 
wants  of  the  inhabitants  to  maintain  the  balance  of 
trade,  which  in  so  luxurious  an  empire  must  always 
have  tended  to  declare  itself  as^ainst  such  r^reat  con- 
sumers.  But  ancient  writers  are  rarely  interested  in 
such  matters  as  trade  and  commerce,  while  the  prob- 
lems of  political  economy  are  wholly  unknown  to 
them.  Hence  they  unfortunately  leave  us  in  the  dark 
on  numerous  points  which  to  us  seem  of  primary 
importance,  and  force  us  to  attempt  to  grope  our  way 
by  reasonable  conjecture. 

We  shall  pass  now  from  the  consideration  of  the 
probable  objects  of  traffic  between  Babylonia  and  other 
countries  to  that  of  the  nature  of  the  traffic,  and  the 
probable  or  certain  direction  of  its  various  lines.  Now 
the  traffic  was,  beyond  all  doubt,  carried  on  in  part  by 
land  and  in  part  by  sea,  the  Babylonians  not  only 
having  dealings  with  their  continental  neighbours,  but 
also  carrying  on  a  commerce  with  islands  and  countries 
which  were  reached  in  ships. 

The  land  traffic  itself  was  of  two  kinds.  Caravans 
composed  of  large  bodies  of  merchants,  with  their 
attendants  and  followers,  proceeded  from  Babylon  in 
various  directions  across  the  continent,  carrying  with 
them,  on  the  backs  of  camels  or  asses,  the  native  com- 
modities which  they  desired  to  sell,  and  returning  after 
a  time  with  such  foreign  productions  as  were  needed 
or  desired  by  the  Babylonians.  Regular  routes  were 
established  which  these  travelling  companies  pursued  ; 


io6  BAB  YL  ON  AND  E G  YPT. 

and  it  is  not  unlikely  that  stations,  or  caravansarais, 
were  provided  for  their  accommodation  at  intervals.^ 
The  mass  of  the  persons  composingthe  caravans  would 
travel  on  foot;  but  the  richer  traders  would  be  mounted 
on  camels,  or  even  sometimes  on  horses.  It  would  be 
necessary  to  be  well  armed  in  order  to  resist  the  attacks 
of  predatory  tribes,  or  organized  bands  of  robbers;^ 
and  the  caravans  would  require  to  be  numerous  for 
the  same  reason.  There  would  be  no  great  difference 
between  these  ancient  companies  and  the  caravans  of 
the  present  day,  except  to  some  extent  in  the  commo- 
dities conveyed,  and  in  the  absence  of  any  other  than 
a  commercial  motive.^ 

Other  traders  preferred  to  convey  their  goods  along 
the  courses  of  the  great  rivers,  which,  intersecting 
Mesopotamia  either  as  main  streams  or  tributaries, 
form  natural  channels  of  commercial  intercourse  with 
the  neighbouring  countries,  at  any  rate,  for  a  con- 
siderable distance.  Boats  and  rafts  readily  descended 
the  Tigris,  the  Euphrates,  and  their  affluents,^  and 
transported  almost  without  effort  the  produce  of 
Commagene,  Armenia,  and  Media  to  the  lower 
Mesopotamian  territory.  It  was  possible  by  the  use 
of  sails  and  by  tracking  to  mount  the  rivers  in  certain 
seasons ;  and  this  we  know  to  have  been  done  on  the 
Euphrates   as    high   as    Thapsacus.^     Water-carriage 

1  See  Herod.,  v.  52,  who,  however,  speaks  of  Persian  times. 

*  See  Ezra,  viii.  22. 

3  The  religious  motive  of  pilgrimage  to  certain  shrines  swells  the  size 
of  modern  caravans. 

*  Herod.,  i.  194.  ^Strab.,  xvi.  4,  §  18. 


NOTICES  IN  EZEKIEL.  107 

was  especially  convenient  for  the  conveyance  of  heavy 
goods,  such  as  stone  for  building  or  for  statuary, 
obelisks,  and  the  like.  Both  the  monuments  and 
profane  writers  indicate  that  it  was  employed  for  these 
purposes.^ 

The  principal  lines  of  land  traffic  seem  to  have 
been  five.  One,  which  may  be  called  the  Western, 
was  along  the  course  of  the  Euphrates  to  about  lat. 
34°  30',  when  it  struck  across  due  west  to  Tadmor,  or 
Palmyra,  and  thence  proceeded  by  way  of  Damascus 
to  Tyre  and  Sidon.  Traces  of  the  employment  of 
this  route  are  found  in  Ezekiel  (chap,  xxvii.  18,  23, 
24).  Along  it  would  be  conveyed  the  whole  of  the 
Phoenician  trade,  including  the  important  imports  of 
tin,  Tyrian  purple,  musical  instruments,  asses  of  supe- 
rior quality,  and  possibly  wine  of  Helbon,  together 
with  the  exports  of  rich  stuffs,  dresses,  and  embroidery. 

Another  kept  to  the  line  of  the  Euphrates  through- 
out, and  may  be  called  the  North-Western  route.  It 
connected  Babylon  with  Upper  Mesopotamia  and 
Armenia.  Along  this  was  conveyed  wine,  and  prob- 
ably copper;  perhaps  also  other  metals.  It  was  a 
route  used  by  Armenian  merchants,  who  descended 
the  stream  in  round  boats,  made  of  wicker-work 
covered  with  skins,  and,  having  sold  their  wares,  broke 
up  the  boats  and  returned  on  foot  to  their  own 
country.^  It  was  used  also  by  the  Babylonian  col- 
onists of  the  Persian  Gulf,  who  mounted  the  stream 

1  "Ancient  Monarchies,"  vol.  i.,  p.  338;  Diod.  Sic,  ii.  II. 

2  Herod.,  i.  194. 


io8  BAB YL ON  AND  EGYPT. 

as  far  as  Thapsacus,  and  thence  carried  their  goods  by 
land  in  various  directions.^ 

The  third  route  was  towards  the  North.  It  con- 
nected Babylon  with  Assyria,  and  probably  followed 
mainly  the  line  of  the  Tigris,  which  it  may  have  struck 
in  the  vicinity  of  the  great  mart  of  Opis.  The  trade 
between  the  two  countries  of  Babylonia  and  Assyria 
was,  in  the  flourishing  times  of  the  latter  country, 
highly  valued ;  and  we  find  frequent  provision  made 
for  its  restoration  or  continuance  in  the  treaties  which 
from  time  to  time  were  concluded  between  the  two 
powers.^  The  alabaster  blocks  which  the  Babylonians 
sometimes  employed  in  their  buildings  came  probably 
by  this  line,  and  the  two  countries  no  doubt  inter- 
changed various  manufactured  products. 

A  fourth  line  of  land  trade,  and  one  of  great  import- 
ance, was  that  towards  the  North-east,  which  may  be 
called  the  Medo-Bactrian.  This  line,  after  crossing 
Mount  Zagros  by  the  way  of  Holwan  and  Behistun,  was 
directed  upon  the  Median  capital  of  Ecbatana,  whence 
it  was  prolonged,  by  way  of  Rhages  and  the  Caspian 
Gates,  to  Balkh,  Herat,  and  Cabul.^  The  lapis  lazuli, 
which  the  Babylonians  employed  extensively,  can  only 
have  come  from  Bactria,^  and  probably  arrived  by  this 
route,  along  which  may  also  have  travelled  much  of 
the  gold  imported  into  Babylon,  many  of  the  gems, 

1  Strab.,  1.  s.  c. 

2  "  Records  of  the  Past,"  vol.  iii.,  pp.  34,  35  ;  vol.  v.,  p.  90. 

3  Heeren,  "Asiatic  Nations,"  vol.  ii.,  pp.  203,  209-211. 
*  Ibid.,  p.  206. 


NOTICES  IN  EZEKIEL.  109 

the  fine  wool,  the  shawls,  the  Indian  dyes,  and  the 
Indian  dogs. 

The  fifth  line  was  towards  the  East  and  South-east. 
At  first  it  ran  nearly  due  east  to  Susa,  but  thence  it 
was  deflected,  and  continued  on  to  the  south-east, 
through  Persepolis,  to  Kerman  (Carmania).  Wool 
was  probably  imported  in  large  quantities  by  this 
route,  together  with  onyxes  fi-om  the  Choaspes,^  cotton, 
and  the  "greyhounds  of  the  East."^ 

The  sea  trade  of  the  Babylonians  was  primarily 
with  the  Persian  Gulf  Here  they  had  an  important 
settlement  on  the  southern  coast,  called  Gerrha,  which 
had  a  large  land  traffic  with  the  interior  of  Arabia, 
and  carried  its  merchandise  to  Babylon  in  ships.^  The 
"ships  of  Ur"  are  often  mentioned  in  the  early  inscrip- 
tions,^ and  the  latter  ones  show  that  numerous  vessels 
were  always  to  be  found  in  the  ports  at  the  head  of 
the  gulf,  and  that  the  Babylonians  readily  crossed  the 
gulf  when  occasion  required.^  It  is  uncertain  whether 
they  adventured  themselves  beyond  its  mouth  into  the 
Indian  Ocean;  but  there  is  reason  to  believe  that  by 
some  means  or  other  they  obtained  Indian  commodi- 
ties which  would  have  come  most  readily  by  this 
route.  The  teak  found  in  their  buildings,  the  ivory 
and  ebony  which  they  almost  certainly  used,  the  cin- 
namon and  the  cotton,  in  the  large  quantities  in  which 

^Dionys.  Perieg.,  11,  1073-1077.  ^ggg  above,  p.  100. 

^Strab.  xvi.  4,  |  18 ;  Agathemer,  "De  Mar.  Eiythr.,"  \  87. 
*  "Ancient  Monarchies,"  vol.  i.,  p.  16,  note  i. 

^"Records  of  the  Past,"  vol.  i.,  pp.  40,  43,  73;  vol.  vii.,  p.  63;  vol. 
ix.,  p.  60. 
10 


I lo  BAB  YLON  AND  EG  YPT. 

they  needed  it,  can  only  have  come  from  the  peninsula 
of  Hindustan,  and  cannot  be  supposed  to  have  travelled 
by  the  circuitous  road  of  Cabul  and  Bactria.  Arabian 
spices  were  conveyed  by  the  Gerrhaeans  in  their  ships 
to  Babylon  itself,  and  the  rest  of  the  trade  of  the 
Gulf  was  probably  chiefly  in  their  hands.  Perfumes 
of  all  kinds,  pearls,  wood  for  shipbuilding  and  walking- 
sticks,  cotton,  gems,  gold,  Indian  fabrics,  flowed  into 
the  Chaldaean  capital  from  the  sea,  and  were  mostly 
brought  to  it  in  ships  up  the  Euphrates,  and  deposited 
on  the  quays  at  the  merchants'  doors,  ^schylus  calls 
the  Babylonians  who  served  in  the  army  of  Xerxes 
"navigators  of  ships." ^  Commercial  dealings  among 
the  dwellers  in  the  city  on  a  most  extensive  scale  are 
disclosed  by  the  Egibi  tablets;^  "spice  merchants" 
appear  among  the  witnesses  to  deeds.^  Their  own 
records  and  the  accounts  of  the  Greeks  are  thus  in 
the  completest  agreement  with  the  Prophet  when  he 
describes  Babylon  as  "  a  land  of  traffick  ...  a  city  of 
merchants," 

1  "^schyl.  Pers,,  11.  52-55. 

2  "Transactions  of  the  Society  of  Biblical  Archgeology,"  vol,  vii.,  pp. 
1-78, 

3 "Records  of  the  Past,"  vol,  xi,,  p,  94. 


CHAPTER  IX. 

FURTHER   NOTICES   OF    BABYLON    IN    DANIEL. 

"  Belshazzar  the  king  made  a  great  feast  to  a  thousand  of  his  lords, 
and  drank  wine  before  the  thousand.  Belshazzar,  whiles  he  tasted  the 
wine,  commanded  to  bring  the  gold  and  silver  vessels  which  his  father, 
Nebuchadnezzar,  had  taken  out  of  the  temple  which  was  in  Jemsalem ; 
that  the  king,  and  his  princes,  his  wives,  and  his  concubines,  might 
drink  therein.  Then  they  brought  the  golden  vessels  that  were  taken 
out  of  the  temple  of  the  house  of  God  that  was  at  Jerusalem  ;  and  the 
king,  and  his  princes,  his  wives,  and  his  concubines,  drank  in  them. 
They  drank  wine,  and  praised  the  gods  of  gold,  and  of  silver,  of  brass, 
of  iron,  of  wood,  and  of  stone." — Dan.  v.  1-4. 

The  main  difficulties  connected  with  the  Book  of 
Daniel  open  upon  us  with  the  commencement  of 
chapter  v.  A  new  king-  makes  his  appearance — a  king 
unknown  to  profane  historians,  and  declared  by  some 
critics  to  be  a  purely  fictitious  personage.^  We  have 
to  consider  at  the  outset  who  this  Belshazzar  can  be. 
Does  he  represent  any  king  known  to  us  under  any 
other  name  in  profane  history?  Can  we  find  a  trace  of 
him  in  the  inscriptions  ?  Or  is  he  altogether  an  obscure 
and  mysterious  personage,  of  whose  very  existence 
we  have  no  trace  outside  Daniel,  and  who  must  there- 

1  See  De  Wette,  «  Einleitung  in  das  Alt.  Test.,"  p.  255  a. 

Ill 


112  BABYL ON  AND  EG  YPT. 

fore  always  constitute  an  historical  difficulty  of  no 
small  magnitude  ? 

Now,  in  the  first  place,  he  is  represented  as  the  son 
of  Nebuchadnezzar  (vers.  2,  ii,  13,  18,  22).  The  only 
son  of  Nebuchadnezzar  of  whom  we  have  any  mention 
in  profane  history  is  Evil-Merodach,^  who  succeeded 
his  father  in  B.C.  562,  and  reigned  somewhat  less  than 
two  years,  ascending  the  throne  in  Tisri  of  B.C.  562, 
and  ceasing  to  reign  in  Ab  of  B.C.  560.^  It  has  been 
suggested  that  the  Belshazzar  of  Daniel  is  this 
monarch.^ 

The  following  are  the  chief  objections  to  this 
theory : — (a)  There  is  no  reason  to  suppose  that  Evil- 
Merodach  ever  bore  any  other  name,  or  was  known  to 
the  Jews  under  one  designation,  to  the  Babylonians 
under  another.  He  appears  in  the  Book  of  Kings 
under  his  rightful  name  of  Evil-Merodach  (2  Kings 
XXV.  27),  and  again  in  the  Book  of  Jeremiah  (Jer.  lii. 
31).  Unless  we  have  distinct  evidence  of  a  monarch 
having  borne  two  names,  it  is  to  the  last  degree 
uncritical  to  presume  it.  {6)  The  third  year  of 
Belshazzar  is  mentioned  in  Daniel  (ch.  viii.  i).  Evil- 
Merodach  is  assigned  two  years  only  by  Ptolemy, 
Berosus,  and  Abydenus;*  the  latest  date  upon  his 
tablets  is  his  second  year;  he  actually  reigned  no  more 

^  Mentioned  by  Berosus,  Fr.  14 ;  Polyhistor  (ap.  Euseb.,  "  Chron. 
Can."  i.  5),  and  Abydenus  (ap.  Euseb.  i.  lo).  He  appears  in  the 
Babylonian  dated  tablets  as  Avil-Marduk. 

2  "  Transactions  of  Bib,  Arch.  Soc,"  vol.  vi.,  pp.  25,  26. 

^  So  Hupfeld  and  Havernick. 

*  Ptol.,  "  Mag.  Syntax.,"  v.  14;  Beros.,  1.  s.  c. ,  Abyden.,  1.  s.  c. 


NOTICES  IN  DANIEL. 


than  a  year  and  ten  months,  (c)  Evil-Merodach  was 
put  to  death  by  his  brother-in-law,  Nerighssar,  in  b.  c. 
560.  Babylon  was  at  this  time  under  no  peril  from 
the  Medes  and  Persians,  to  whom  the  death  of 
Belshazzar  appears  to  be  attributed  (vers.  28-30).  (^) 
The  identification  of  Belshazzar  with  Evil-Merodach 
involves  that  of  "  Darius  the  Median  "  (ver.  31)  with 
Nerighssar,  who  was  not  a  Mede,  and  had  a  name  as 
remote  as  possible  from  that  of  Darius. 

If  Belshazzar  be  not  Evil-Merodach,  can  he  be 
Nerighssar?  Here  the  name  is  not  so  great  a  difficulty. 
For,  in  the  first  place,  the  two  words  have  two  elements 
in  common.  Nerighssar  is  in  the  Babylonian,  Nergal- 
sar-uzur,  while  Belshazzar  is  Bel-sar-uzur.  Moreover, 
it  was  not  an  unknown  thing  in  Babylonia  and  Assyria 
to  substitute  in  a  royal  designation  the  name  of  one 
god  for  another.^  But,  per  contra^  (a)  Nergal  was  a 
god  so  distinct  from  Bel,  that  we  can  scarcely  imagine 
such  a  substitution  as  Bel  for  Nergal  having  been 
allowable,  {b)  Neriglissar  was  the  son-in-law,  not  the 
son,  of  Nebuchadnezzar,  {c)  He  appears  to  have  died 
peaceably,  and  to  have  been  succeeded  by  his  son, 
Labasi-Merodach  (Labossoracus),^  instead  of  being 
"  slain "  suddenly,  and  succeeded  by  a  Darius.  It 
seems  therefore  impossible  that  the  Belshazzar  of 
Daniel  can  be  Neriglissar. 

Is  he,  then,  as  Josephus  supposed,  Nabonidus?^ 
Nabonidus,  according  to  Ptolemy  and  Berosus,  was  the 

^ "  Transactions  of  Bib.  Arch.  Soc,"  vol.  vi.,  p.  28. 
2 Berosus,  1.  s.  c.  "  Joseph.,  "Ant.  Jud.,"  x.  ii,  I  2. 

8 


1 14  BAB  YL  ON  AND  E  G  YPT. 

last  native  king.  The  Medes  and  Persians  destroyed 
his  kingdom,  and  made  him  prisoner ;  after  which,  in 
a  httle  time,  he  died.  On  his  capture  the  Medo- 
Persian  rule  was  established,  and  continued  thence- 
forth uninterruptedly  except  for  one  or  two  revolts. 
Here,  again,  {a)  the  name  is  an  insuperable  difficulty  : 
nothing  can  well  be  more  unlike  Belshazzar  than  Nabu- 
nahid.  But,  further,  (6)  Nabu-nahid  is  distinctly  said 
to  have  been  in  no  way  related  to  Nebuchadnezzar.^ 
[c)  Also  his  mother  died  in  the  ninth  year  of  his 
reign,^  eight  years  before  his  own  capture  and  decease; 
but  it  is  the  mother  of  Belshazzar  probably  who  comes 
into  the  banquet  house  at  the  time  of  his  feast.^  (d) 
Nabonidus,  again,  did  not  die  on  the  night  that  his 
kingdom  passed  to  the  Medes  and  Persians,  as 
Belshazzar  did  (ver.  30).  On  the  contrary,  he  survived 
eight  months.'*  Thus  the  hypothesis  that  Belshazzar 
is  Nabonidus,  though  embraced  by  many,^  is  as  unten- 
able as  the  others  ;  and  we  have  still  to  seek  an  answer 
to  the  question,  Who  was  the  Belshazzar  of  Daniel  ? 

A  discovery  made  by  Sir.  H.  Rawlinson  in  the  year 
1854  gave  the  first  clue  to  what  we  incline  to  regard 
as  the  true  answer.      On  cylinders  placed  by  Nabo- 

1  Abydenus,  1.  s.  c. 

2  See  the  "Nabonidus  Tablet,"  in  the  "Transactions  of  the  Bib. 
Arch.  Soc,"  vol.  vii.,  p.  158. 

3  See  "  vSpeaker's  Commentary"  on  Dan,  v.  10;  and  compare  Pusey's 
<*  Daniel,"  p.  449. 

*This  is  proved  by  the  "  Nabonidus  Tablet"  ("  Transactions,  etc.," 
vol.  vii.,  pp.  165-7). 

&As  Josephus,  Heeren,  Clinton,  Winer,  and  others. 


NO  TICES  IN  DA  NIEL .  115 

nidus  at  the  corners  of  the  great  temple  of  Ur,  he 
mentioned  by  name  '*  his  eldest  son,  Bel-sar-uzur,"  and 
prayed  the  moon-god  to  take  him  under  his  protection, 
"  that  his  glory  might  endure."  On  reading  this  the 
learned  decypherer  at  once  declared  it  to  be  his  opinion 
that  Bel-sar-uzur  had  been  associated  in  the  govern- 
ment by  his  father,  and  possessed  the  kingly  power. 
If  this  were  so,  it  could  scarcely  be  disputed  that  he 
was  Daniel's  Belshazzar.  Sir.  H.  Rawlinson's  inference 
from  the  inscription  has,  however,  been  denied.  Mr. 
Fox  Talbot  has  maintained  that  the  inscription  does 
not  furnish  "  the  slightest  evidence  "  that  Bel-sar-uzur 
was  ever  regarded  as  co-regent  with  his  father.  "  He 
may,"  he  says,  "  have  been  a  mere  child  when  it  was 
written."  ^  The  controversy  turns  upon  the  question, 
What  was  Oriental  practice  in  this  matter?  Sir.  H. 
Rawlinson  holds  that  Oriental  monarchs  generally, 
and  the  Assyrian  and  Babylonian  kings  in  particular, 
were  so  jealous  of  possible  rivals  in  their  own  family, 
that  they  did  not  name  even  their  sons  upon  public 
documents  unless  they  had  associated  them.  Kudur- 
mabuk  mentions  his  son  Rim-agu  ;  ^  but  he  has  made 
him  King  of  Larsa.  Sennacherib  mentions  Asshur- 
nadin-sum,^  but  on  the  occasion  of  his  elevation  to  the 
throne  of  Babylon.  Apart  from  these  instances,  and 
that  of  Bel-sar-uzur,  there  does  not  seem  to  be  any 
mention  made  of  their  sons  by  name  by  the  monarchs 
of  either  country. 

*"  Records  of  the  Past,"  vol.  v.,  p.  144. 

2  Ibid.,  vol.  iii.,  p.  20.  ^Ibid.,  vol.  i.,  p.  40. 


Ii6  BAB YL ON  AND  EGYPT. 

The  supposition  that  Bel-sar-uzur  may  have  been 
**  a  mere  child "  when  the  inscription  on  which  his 
name  occurs  was  set  up,  is  completely  negatived  by 
the  newly-discovered  tablet  of  Nabonidus,  which 
shows  him  to  have  had  a  son — and  Bel-sar-uzur  was 
his  "eldest  son  " — who  held  the  command  of  his  main 
army  from  his  seventh  year,  B.C.  549,  to  his  eleventh, 
B.C.  545.^  It  is  a  reasonable  supposition  that  the 
prince  mentioned  upon  this  tablet  was  Bel-sar-uzur. 
He  is  called  emphatically  "  the  king's  son,"  and  is 
mentioned  five  times.  While  Cyrus  is  threatening 
Babylon  both  on  the  north  and  on  the  south,  Nabo- 
nidus is  shown  to  have  remained  sluggish  and  inert 
within  the  walls  of  the  capital,  the  true  kingly  power 
being  exercised  by  "  the  king's  son,"  who  is  with  the 
army  and  the  officers  in  Akkad,  or  northern  Babylonia, 
watching  Cyrus  and  protecting  Babylon.  When  the 
advance  of  the  army  of  Cyrus  is  finally  made,  what "  the 
king's  son  "  did  is  not  told  us.  Nabonidus  must  have 
roused  himself  from  his  lethargy  and  joined  his  troops ; 
but  as  soon  as  he  found  himself  in  danger,  he  fled. 
Pursuit  was  made,  and  he  was  captured — possibly  in 
Borsippa,  as  Berosus  related.^  The  victorious  Persians 
took  him  with  them  into  Babylon.  If  at  this  time 
"the  king's  son  "  was  still  alive,  any  further  resistance 
that  was  made  must,  almost  certainly,  have  been  made 
by  him.  Now  such  resistance  was  made.  A  body  of 
"  rebels,"  as  they  are  called,  threw  themselves  into  Bit- 
Saggatu,  or  the  fortified  enclosure  within  which  stood 

^"Transactions,"  vol.  vii.,  pp.  156-161.  ^gg^-Qsi^is^  Yr.  14. 


NO  TICES  IN  DANIEL.  1 1 7 


the  Great  Temple  of    Bel-Merodach  and   the   Royal 
Palace,  and  shutting  to  the  gates,  defied  the  enemy. 
It  is  true  our  record  says  no  preparations  had  been 
made  previously  for  the  defence  of   the   place,  and 
there  was   no  store    of  weapons   within  it.     But  the 
soldiers  would  have  their  own  weapons :  the  temple 
and  the  palace  would  probably  be  well  supplied  with 
wine  and  provisions ;  the  defences  would  be  strong ; 
and  the  feeling  of  the  defenders  may  well  have  been 
such  as  Herodotus  ascribes  to  the  mass  of  the  Baby- 
lonians when  they  shut  themselves  within  the  walls  of 
the  town.^     Bel-sar-uzur  and  his  lords  may  have  felt 
so   secure   that   they  could  indulge   in    feasting   and 
revelry.     They  may  have  maintained  their  position  for 
months.     It  is  at  any  rate  most  remarkable  that  the 
writer  of  the   tablet,   having    launched   his    shaft   of 
contempt  against   the   foolish  "  rebels,"   interposes  a 
break  of  more  than  four  months  between  this  and  the 
next  paragraph-     It  was  at  the  end  of  Tammuz  that 
the  "  rebels  "  closed  the  gates  of  Bit-Saggatu  ;  it  was 
not  till  the  3d  day  of  Marchesvan   that    "Cyrus  to 
Babylon  descended,"  and  established  peace  there.     It 
may  have  been  on  the  night  of  his  arrival  with  strong 
reinforcements  that  the  final  attack  was  made,  and  that 
Belshazzar,  having  provoked  God  by  a  wanton  act  of 
impiety,  "was  slain"  (ver.  31).      Nearly  five   months 
later,  on  the  27th  of  Adar, "  the  king  (Nabonidus)  died." 
It  is  objected  to  the  view,  that  the  Belshazzar  of 
Daniel  is  Bel-sar-uzur,  the  eldest  son  of  Nabonidus  : — 
1  Herod.,  i.  190. 


BAB  YL ON  AND  EG  YPT. 


I.  That  Belshazzar  is  called  repeatedly  the  son  of 
Nebuchadnezzar/  while  we  have  no  evidence  that  Bel- 
sar-uzur  was  in  any  way  related  to  that  monarch.  2. 
That  "  the  Book  of  Daniel  gives  not  the  least  hint  of 
Belshazzar  as  having  a  father  still  alive  and  on  the 
throne."^  The  first  of  these  objections  has  been  often 
answered.^  In  Scripture,  it  has  been  observed, "  father" 
stands  for  any  male  ancestor,  "  son "  for  any  male 
descendant.  Jehoshaphat  is  called  "  the  son  of  Nimshi," 
though  really  his  grandson ;  Jesus  of  Nazareth  is  "  the 
son  of  David,"  who  is  "  the  son  of  Abraham  "  (Matt. 
i.  i) ;  Ezra  is  "  the  son  of  Seraiah  "  (Ezra  vii.  i),  the 
"  chief  priest "  of  the  captivity  (2  Kings  xxv.  1 8),  who 
died  B.C.  586  (ver.  21),  of  whom  Ezra  therefore  (b.c. 
460-440)  must  have  been  really  the  grandson  or 
great-grandson.  Conversely,  Abraham,  Isaac,  and 
Jacob  are  the  ''  fathers "  of  the  Israelites  after  they 
have  been  four  hundred  years  in  Egypt  (Exod.  iii.  15, 
16) ;  Jonadab,  the  son  of  Rechab,  the  friend  of  Jehu 
(2  Kings  X.  15),  is  the  "father"  of  the  Rechabites, 
contemporary  with  Jeremiah  (Jer.  xxxv.  6);  and 
Jehoram,  king  of  Judah,  is  the  father  of  Uzziah  (Matt. 
i.  8),  his  fourth  descendant.  The  rationale  of  the 
matter  is  as  follows  :  Neither  in  Hebrew  nor  in  Chaldee 
is  there  any  word  for  "  grandfather  "  or  "  grandson." 
To  express  the  relationship  it  would  be  necessary  to 
say  "  father's  father  "  and  "  son's  son."     But  "  father's 


1  Fox  Talbot,  in  "  Records  of  the  Past,"  vol.  v.,  p.  144.         2  ibj^, 
'  See  the  author's  "  Bampton  Lectures,"  Lecture  V.,  pp.  134,  135, 
and  note. 


NOTICES  IN  DANIEL.  119 

father "  and  "  son's  son "  are,  by  an  idiom  of  the 
language,  used  with  an  idea  of  remoteness — to  express 
distant  ancestors  or  descendants.  Consequently  they 
are  rendered  by  this  usage  unapt  to  express  the  near 
relationship  of  grandfather  and  grandson ;  and  the 
result  is  that  they  are  very  rarely  so  used.  As  Dr. 
Pusey  has  well  observed,^  "  A  single  grandfather,  or 
forefather,  is  never  called  *  father's  father,'  always 
'father'  only."  This  is  so  alike  in  early  and  in  late 
Hebrew ;  and  the  Chaldee  follows  the  idiom.  Jacob 
says,  **  The  God  of  my  father,  the  God  of  Abraham, 
and  the  fear  of  Isaac  "  (Gen.  xxxi.  42).  God  says  to 
Aaron,  '*  The  tribe  of  Levi,  the  tribe  of  thy  father " 
(Num.  xviii.  2).  The  confession  to  be  made  at  the 
offering  of  the  first-fruits  began,  "  a  Syrian,  ready  to 
perish,  was  my  father  "  (Deut.  xxvi.  5) ;  and  in  the 
same  sense,  probably,  Moses  says,  "  the  God  of  my 
father"  (Exod.  xviii.  4).  David  said  to  Mephibosheth, 
"  I  will  surely  show  thee  kindness  for  Jonathan  thy 
father's  sake,  and  will  restore  to  thee  all  the  land  of 
Saul  thy  father  "  (2  Sam.  ix.  7).  And  Asa  is  said  to 
have  "  removed  Maachah,  his  mother,  from  being 
queen,"  though  it  is  said  in  the  same  chapter  that  she 
was  the  mother  of  Abijam,  his  father  (i  Kings  xv.  2, 
1 3).  Maachah  herself,  who  is  called  ''  daughter  of 
Absalom"  (i  Kings  xv.  2),  was  really  his  grand- 
daughter, he  having  left  only  one  daughter,  Tamar  (2 
Sam.  xiv.  27),  and  her  own  father  being  Uriel  (2  Chron. 
xiii.  2).  Again  it  is  said,  "  Asa  did  right  in  the  eyes 
^  See  his  "  Lectures  on  Daniel,"  Lecture  VII.,  pp.  405,  406. 


I20  BAB YL ON  AND  EGYPT. 

of  the  Lord,  as  did  David  his  father  "  (i  Kings  xv.  1 1), 
and  in  Hke  way  of  Hezekiah  (2  Kings  xviii.  3).  Con- 
trariwise, it  is  said  that  "  Ahaz  did  not  right  Hke  David 
his  father  "  (xvi.  2) ;  that  "  Amaziah  did  right,  yet  not 
Hke  David  his  father ;  he  did  according  to  aU  things  as 
Joash  his  father  did  "  (xiv.  3).  Here,  in  one  verse,  the 
actual  father  and  the  remote  grandfather  are  aHke 
caUed  "his  father;"  as  before  the  father  and  grand- 
father of  Mephibosheth  were  caUed,  in  the  same  verse, 
"his  father."  "Josiah,"  it  is  said, "walked  in  the  ways 
of  David  his  father ;  he  began  to  seek  the  God  of 
David  his  father"  (2  Chron.  xxxiv.  2,  3).  In  Isaiah 
there  occur  "Jacob  thy  father"  (Isa.  Iviii.  14);  "thy 
first  father  "  (xliii.  27) — /.  c,  Adam  ;  and  to  Hezekiah 
he  said,  "  Thus  saith  the  Lord,  the  God  of  David  thy 
father  "  (xxxviii.  5).  So,  on  the  other  hand,  there  is 
no  Hebrew  or  Chaldee  word  to  express  "  grandson." 
In  laws,  if  the  relation  has  to  be  expressed,  the  idiom 
is  "thy  son's  daughter"  (Lev.  xviii.  10),  or  thy 
"  daughter's  daughter  "  (Ibid.) ;  or  it  is  said,  "  Thou 
shalt  tell  it  to  thy  son's  son  "  (Exod.  x.  2) ;  "  Rule 
thou  over  us,  thou,  and  thy  son,  and  thy  son's  son  " 
(Judg.  viii.  22).  The  relation  can  be  expressed  in  this 
way  in  the  abstract,  but  there  is  no  way  in  Hebrew  or 
Chaldee  to  mark  that  one  person  was  the  grandson  of 
another,  except  in  the  way  of  genealogy — "  Jehu,  the 
son  of  Jehoshaphat,  the  son  of  Nimshi."  And  so  the 
name  "  son  "  stands  for  the  "  grandson,"  and  a  person 
is  at  times  called  the  son  of  the  more  remarkable 
grandfather,  the  link  of  the  father's  name  being  omitted. 


NO  TICKS  IN  DANIEL.  1 2 1 

Thus  Jacob  asked  for  "  Laban,  the  son  of  Nahor  "  (Gen. 
xxix.  5),  omitting  the  immediate  father,  Bethuel;  Jehu 
is  called  "the  son  of  Nimshi "  (i  Kings  xix.  16;  2 
Kings  ix.  20),  omitting  his  own  father,  Jehoshaphat. 
The  prophet  Zechariah  is  called  "  the  son  of  Iddo  " 
(Ezra  V.  i  ;  vi.  14),  his  own  father  being  Berachiah 
(Zech.  i.  i).  Hence  the  Rechabites  said,  as  a  matter 
of  course,  "  Jonadab,  the  son  of  Rechab,  our  father, 
commanded  us ;  w^e  have  obeyed  in  all  things  the 
voice  of  Jonadab,  the  son  of  Rechab,  our  father " 
(Jer.  XXXV.  6,  8) ;  although  Jonadab  lived  some  one 
hundred  and  eighty  years  before  (2  Kings  x.  1 5).  And 
reciprocally  God  says,  "  The  words  of  Jonadab,  the 
son  of  Rechab,  that  he  commanded  his  sons,  are  per- 
formed "  (ver.  14) ;  and  "  Because  ye  have  obeyed  the 
commandments  of  Jonadab  your  father,  and  kept  all 
his  precepts"  (ver.  16). 

But,  it  is  objected,  all  this  may  be  true;  yet  it 
proves  nothing.  Nabonidus  zvas  not  in  any  ivay 
related  to  Nebuchadnezzar — he  was  *'  merely  a  Baby- 
lonian nobleman."^  How,  then,  should  his  son  be 
even  Nebuchadnezzar's  grandson  ?  This,  too,  has 
been  answered,^  and  it  is  curious  that  the  answer 
should  be  ignored.  Belshazzar,  it  has  been  observed, 
may  have  been  the  grandson  of  Nebuchadnezzar  on 
the  mother  s  side.  His  father,  Nabonidus,  may  have 
married  one  of  Nebuchadnezzar's  daughters. 

It  must  be  granted  that  we  have  no  proof  that  he 

^  Fox  Talbot,  in  "Records  of  the  Past,"  vol.  v.,  p.  144, 

2  See  the  author's  "  Bampton  Lectures,"  Lecture  V.,  note  41. 


BAB  YL  ON  AND  EG  YPT. 


did.  We  have,  however,  some  indications  from  which 
we  should  naturally  have  drawn  the  conclusion  inde- 
pendently of  the  Book  of  Daniel.  Two  pretenders  to 
the  throne  of  Babylon  started  up  during  the  reign  of 
Darius  Hystaspis,  both  of  whom  called  themselves 
**  Nebuchadnezzar,  son  of  Nabonidus."^  It  is  certain 
from  this  that  Nabonidus  must  have  had  a  son  so 
called,  for  no  pretender  would  assume  the  name  of  a 
person  who  never  existed.  How,  then,  are  we  to 
account  for  Nabonidus  having  given  this  name  to  one 
of  his  sons?  Usurpers,  as  a  rule,  desire  not  to  recall 
the  memory  of  the  family  which  they  have  dispos- 
sessed. The  Sargonidae  discarded  all  the  names  in 
use  among  their  predecessors.  So  did  the  Egyptian 
monarchs  of  the  eighteenth  and  nineteenth  dynasties. 
So,  again,  did  those  of  the  twenty-first,  and  the  Psam- 
metichi.  Nabonidus  must  have  intended  to  claim  a 
family  connection  with  the  preceding  Babylonian 
monarchs  when  he  thus  named  a  son.  And  if  he  was 
indeed  "no  way  related  to  Nebuchadnezzar,"  the 
connection  could  only  have  been  by  marriage.  The 
probability,  therefore,  is  that  the  principal  wife  of 
Nabonidus,  the  queen  (or  queen-mother)  of  Dan.  v. 
lo,  was  a  daughter  of  Nebuchadnezzar,  and  that 
through  her  Belshazzar  was  Nebuchadnezzar's  grand- 
son. 

But  further:  it  is  objected  that  "the  Book  of  Daniel 
gives   not  the  slightest  hint  of  Belshazzar  having  a 

^See  the  "Behistun  Inscription,"  in  the  author's  "Herodotus,"  vol. 
ii.,  pp.  596,  606. 


NO  TICES  IN  DANIEL.  1 23 

father  alive,  and  still  upon  the  throne."^  In  reply  it 
may  be  said,  in  the  first  place,  that,  were  it  so,  no 
surprise  need  be  felt ;  since,  if  the  circumstances  were 
as  above  supposed,  if  Nabonidus  after  a  shameful 
flight  was  a  prisoner  in  the  hands  of  the  enemy,  and 
Belshazzar  was  conducting  the  defence  alone,  any 
distinct  allusion  to  the  captured  king  would  be 
improbable.  But,  secondly,  it  is  not  true  that  there  is 
"no  hint."  Belshazzar  makes  proclamation  that,  if 
any  one  can  read  and  interpret  the  writing  miracu- 
lously inscribed  upon  the  wall,  "  he  shall  be  clothed 
with  scarlet,  and  have  a  chain  of  gold  about  his  neck, 
and  shall  be  the  third  ruler  in  the  kingdom"  (v.  7); 
and  when  Daniel  has  read  and  interpreted  the  words, 
the  acts  promised  are  performed — "they  clothed 
Daniel  with  scarlet,  and  put  a  chain  of  gold  about  his 
neck,  and  made  a  proclamation  concerning  him,  that 
he  should  be  tJie  third  rider  in  the  kingdom  "  (ver.  29). 
It  has  been  suggested  that  to  be  the  "third  ruler"  was 
to  be  one  of  the  three  presidents  who  were  subse- 
quently set  over  the  satraps  (vi.  2) ;  but  neither  is  this 
the  plain  force  of  the  words,  nor  was  the  organization 
of  chap.  vi.  I,  2  as  yet  existing.  To  be  "the  third 
ruler  in  the  kingdom "  is  to  hold  a  position  one 
degree  lower  than  that  of  "  second  from  the  king," 
which  was  conferred  upon  Joseph  (Gen.  xli.  40-44), 
and  upon  Mordecai  (Esth.  x.  3)  ;  it  is  to  hold  a  posi- 
tion in  the  kingdom  inferior  to  two  persons,  and  to 
two  persons  only.  That  the  proclamation  ran  in  this 
1  Fox  Talbot,  in  "  Records  of  the  Past,"  I.  s  c. 


1 24  BAB  YL  ON  AND  EGYPT. 

form  is  a  "  hint,"  and  more  than  a  hint,  that  the  first 
and  second  places  were  occupied,  that  there  were  two 
kings  upon  the  throne,  and  that  therefore  the  highest 
position  that  could,  under  the  circumstances,  be 
granted  to  a  subject  was  the  third  place,  the  place 
next  to  the  two  sovereigns.  If  we  compare  the  two 
nearly  parallel  cases  of  Joseph  and  Mordecai — subjects 
whom  their  despotic  master  "  delighted  to  honour  " — 
with  that  of  Daniel  at  this  time,  we  shall  find  it 
scarcely  possible  to  assign  any  other  reason  for  his 
being  promoted  to  the  third  place  in  the  kingdom  than 
the  fact  that  the  first  and  second  places  were  already 
occupied  by  the  son  and  father,  Belshazzar  and 
Nabonidus. 


CHAPTER   X. 

FURTHER    NOTICES   OF    BABYLON    IN    DANIEL. 

"Darius  the  Median  took  the  kingdom,  being  about  threescore  and 
two  years  old.  It  pleased  Darius  to  set  over  the  kingdom  an  hundred 
and  twenty  princes,  which  should  be  over  the  whole  kingdom." — 
Dan.  v.  31  ;  vi.  i. 

The  reign  of  '*  Darius  the  Median"  over  Babylon  is 
the  second  great  historical  difficulty  which  the  Book 
of  Daniel  presents  to  the  modern  inquirer.  Accord- 
ing to  Herodotus,^  Berosus,^  and  the  Canon  of  Ptolemy, 
the  immediate  successor  of  Nabonidus  (Labynetus) 
was  Cyrus — no  king  intervened  between  them.  The 
Babylonian  records  are  in  accord.  Two  contemporary 
documents*'^  declare  that  Cyrus  defeated  Nabonidus, 
captured  him,  and  took  the  direction  of  affairs  into 
his  own  hands.  One  of  them  contains  a  proclamation, 
issued  by  Cyrus,  as  it  would  seem,  immediately  after 
his  conquest,^  in  which  he  assumes  the  recognised 
titles  of  Babylonian  sovereignty,  calling  himself  "  the 

1  Herod.,  i.  188,  191.  2i3ei.osus,  Fr.  14. 

^See  the  "Cylinder  Inscription  of  Cjtus,"  published  in  the  "Journal 
of  the  Royal  Asiatic  Society,"  vol.  xii.,  pp.  85-9;  and  "Transactions 
of  Bibl.  Archoeol.  Society,"  vol.  vii.,  pp.  153-169. 

*"As.  Soc.  Journ.,"  vol.  xii.,  p.  87. 

125 


1 26  BAB  YL  ON  AND  E  G  YPT. 

great  king,  the  powerful  king,  the  king  of  Babylon, 
the  king  of  Sumir  and  Akkad,  the  king  of  the  four 
regions."  Who,  then,  it  has  to  be  asked,  is  this 
"Darius  the  Median,"  who  "took  the  kingdom,"  and 
made  arrangements  for  its  government,  immediately 
after  the  fall  of  the  native  Babylonian  power,  and  its 
suppression  by  that  of  the  Medes  and  Persians  ? 

All  that  Scripture  tells  us  of  "  Darius  the  Median," 
besides  the  points  already  mentioned,  is  that  he  was 
the  son  of  Ahasuerus,  that  he  was  an  actual  Mede  by 
descent  ("of  the  seed  of  the  Medes,"  Dan.  ix.  i),  that 
he  advanced  Daniel  to  a  high  dignity  (ch.  vi.  2),  and 
that  afterwards  he  cast  Daniel  into  the  den  of  lions 
and  released  him.  The  first  and  second  of  these  facts 
seem  conclusive  against  a  theory  which  has  been  of 
late  years  strongly  advocated — viz.,  that  he  is  really 
"Darius  the  son  of  Hystaspis,"^  the  great  Darius,  the 
only  Darius  mentioned  in  Scripture,  except  Codo- 
mannus,  whose  name  occurs  in  one  place  (Neh.  xii.  22). 
We  know  not  only  the  father,  but  the  entire  descent 
of  Darius  Hystaspis,  up  to  Achaemenes,  the  founder 
of  the  Persian  royal  family;^  and  we  find  no  "Ahasue- 
rus"— the  Hebrew  form  of  the  Persian  KhsJiayarsha, 
the  Greek  Xerxes — in  the  list.  There  is  the  strongest 
evidence  that  he  was  of  pure  Persian  race,  and  not  an 
atom  of  evidence  that  he  had  any  Median  blood  in  his 
veins.     It  is  among  his  proudest  boasts  that  he  is  "  an 

^Particularly  by  Mr.  Bosanquet  ("  Transactions,"  etc.,  vol.  vi.,  pp.  84, 
100,  130). 
2  See  the  Author's  "  Herodotus,"  vol.  iv.,  pp.  254-5. 


NO  TICES  IN  DANIEL.  127 

Aryan,  of  Aryan  descent,  a  Persian,  the  son  of  a 
Persian."^  He  was  a  member  of  the  Persian  royal 
family,  closely  akin  to  Cyrus.  The  Medes  revolted 
against  him,  and  fought  desperately  to  throw  off  his 
authority  and  place  themselves  under  a  real  Mede, 
Frawartish,  who  claimed  to  be  "of  the  race  of 
Cyaxares."^  Cyrus  might  with  better  reason  be 
called  a  Mede  than  Darius,  for  some  high  author- 
ities gave  Cyrus  a  Median  mother;^  but  there  is 
no  such  tradition  with  respect  to  Darius,  the  son  of 
Hystaspis. 

Another  extraordinary  theory,  recently  broached, 
identifies  "  Darius  the  Mede  "  with  Cyrus.*  Darius, 
it  is  said,  may  be  in  Daniel,  not  a  name,  but  a  title. 
Etymologically  the  name  would  mean  "  holder,"  or 
"  firm  holder,"  and  it  may  therefore  have  been  a  syno- 
nym for  king  or  ruler.  Daryavesh  Madaya  (in  Dan. 
v.  31)  may  mean,  not  "Darius  the  Mede,"  but  only 
"the  king  or  ruler  of  the  Medes,  a  fit  title  for  Cyrus"! 

But  how  does  this  conjectural  explanation  suit  the 
other  passages  of  Daniel  where  the  name  of  Darius 
occurs  ?  We  read  in  ch.  vi.  28,  "  So  this  Daniel  pros- 
pered in  the  reign  of  Darius,  a7id  in  the  reign  of  Cyrus, 
the  Persian!'  Does  this  mean,  he  prospered  "in  the 
reign  of  Cyrus,  and  in  the  reign  of  Cyrus  "  ?  Again,  we 
read,  in  ch.  ix.  I,  of  "  Darius,  the  son  of  Ahasuerus." 
How  can  this  apply  to  Cyrus,  who  was  the  son  of 

^  See  the  Author's  "  Herodotus,"  vol.  iv.,  p.  250. 
2  Ibid,,  vol.  ii.,  pp.  598-602. 
3 Herod.,  i.  108;  Xen.  "  Cyrop.,"  i.  2,  g  i. 
*"  Transactions,"  etc.,  vol.  vi.,  p.  29. 


1 28  BAB YL ON  AND  EGYPT. 

Cambyses  ?  Further,  how  are  we  to  understand  the 
expression  "  King  Darius,"  which  occurs  in  ch.  vi.  6, 
9,  25?  Does  it  mean  **  king,  king  "  ?  We  will  not 
insult  our  readers'  intellects  by  continuing.  We  will 
only  add  one  less  obvious  argument,  an  argument 
which  may  further  our  quest,  and  give  us  perhaps 
some  help  in  determining,  not  only  who  "  Darius  the 
Median  "  was  not,  but  who  he  was. 

It  is  said,  in  ch.  v.  31,  that  *' Darius  the  Median 
took  the  kingdom,"  and  in  ch.  ix.  i,  that  he  "  zvas  made 
king  over  the  realm  of  the  Chaldeans."  Neither  of  these 
two  expressions  is  suitable  to  Cyrus.  The  word  trans- 
lated "took"  means  '*  received,"  "  took  from  the  hands 
of  another ;  "  and  the  other  passage  is  yet  more  unmis- 
takable. "Was  made  king"  exactly  expresses  the 
original,  which  uses  the  Hophal  of  the  verb,  the 
Hiphel  of  which  occurs  when  David  makes  Solomon 
king  over  Israel  (i  Chron.  xxix.  20).  No  one  v/ould 
say  of  Alexander  the  Great,  when  he  conquered 
Darius  Codomannus,  that  he  "  was  made  king  over 
Persia."  The  expression  implies  the  reception  of  a 
kingly  position  by  one  man  from  the  hands  of  another. 
Now  Babylon,  while  under  the  Assyrians,  had  been 
almost  always  governed  by  viceroys,  who  received 
their  crown  from  the  Assyrian  monarchs.^  It  was  not 
unnatural  that  Cyrus  should  follow  the  same  system. 
He  had  necessarily  to  appoint  a  governor,  and  the 
"  Nabonidus  Tablet "  tells  us  that  he  did  so  almost 
immediately  after  taking  possession  of  the  city.     The 

^  "Ancient  Monarchies,"  vol.  iii.,  p.  42. 


NOTICES  IN  DANIEL.  129 

first  governor  appointed  was  a  certain  Gobryas/  whose 
nationality  is  doubtful ;  but  he  appears  to  have  been 
shortly  afterwards  sent  to  some  other  locality.^  A 
different  arrangement  must  have  been  then  made. 
That  Cyrus  should  have  appointed  a  Mede,  and 
allowed  him  to  take  the  title  of  "  king,"  is  in  no  way 
improbable.  He  was  fond  of  appointing  Medes  to 
high  office,  as  we  learn  from  Herodotus.^  He  was 
earnestly  desirous  of  conciliating  the  Babylonians,  as 
we  find  from  his  cylinder.*  It  was  not  many  years 
before  he  gave  his  son,  Cambyses,  the  full  royal  power 
at  Babylon,  relinquishing  it  himself,  as  appears  from  a 
dated  tablet.^  The  position  of  "  Darius  the  Median  " 
in  Daniel  is  compatible  with  all  that  we  know  with 
any  certainty  from  other  sources.  We  have  only  to 
suppose  that  Cyrus,  in  the  interval  between  the  brief 
governorship  of  Gobryas  and  the  sovereignty  of 
Cambyses,  placed  Babylon  under  a  Median  noble 
named  Darius,  and  allowed  him  a  position  interme- 
diate between  that  of  a  mere  ordinary  "  governor  " 
and  the  full  royal  authority. 

The  position  of  Darius  the  Median,  as  a  subject- 
king  set  up  by  Cyrus,  has  been  widely  accepted ;  but 
critics  have  not  been  content  to  rest  at  this  point. 
Attempts  have  been  made  to  identify  him  further  with 

^  So  at  least  I  understand  the  passage  ("Transactions,"  etc.,  vol.  vii., 
p.  166,  1.  20). 

2  Ibid.,  p.  167,  1.  22.     The  reading  is  uncertain. 
'Herod.,  i.  156,  162. 

*"  Journal  of  Royal  Asiatic  Society,"  vol.  xii.,  pp.  87-9. 
^"Transactions,"  etc.,  vol.  vi.,  p.  489. 
9 


I30  BAB  YL  ON  AND  E G  YPT. 


some  person  celebrated  in  history;  and  it  has  been 
suggested  that  he  was  either  Astyages,  the  last  Median 
monarch/  or  his  supposed  son,  Cyaxares.^  Neither 
identification  can  be  substantiated.  The  very  exist- 
ence of  a  second  Cyaxares,  the  son  of  Astyages,  is 
more  than  questionable.^  The  names  are,  in  both 
cases,  unsuitable.  The  age  of  Darius  when  he  ''took 
the  kingdom"  falls  short  of  the  probable  age  of 
Astyages.  It  seems  best  to  acquiesce  in  the  view  of 
those  who  hold  that  "  Darius  the  Mede  is  an  historic 
character,"  but  one  "  whose  name  has  not  yet  been 
found  except  in  Scripture."^ 

It  is  in  no  way  surprising  that,  on  being  set  over 
the  realm  of  the  Chaldees,  Darius  should  have  occu- 
pied himself  in  giving  it  a  new  organization.  We  are 
scarcely  entitled  to  assume,  from  the  expression  used 
in  Dan.  vi.  i,  that  he  called  his  new  officers  "satraps;" 
but  still  it  is  quite  possible  that  he  used  the  word, 
which  had  not  yet  received  a  technical  sense,  and  only 
meant  etymologically  "  supporters  of  the  crown." 
The  number,  one  hundred  and  twenty,  is  more  than 
we  should  have  expected,  and  can  receive  no  support 
from  the  hundred  and  twenty-seven  provinces  of 
Ahasuerus  (Esth.  i.  i),  who  ruled  from  Ethiopia  to 
India,  whereas  Darius  reigned  only  over  the  realm  of 


^  So  Syncellus,  Jackson,  Marsham,  and  Winer, 
.    "^  So  Josephus,  Prideaux,  Hales,  Hengstenberg,  Von  Lengerke,  and 
others. 

3  Herodotus  declares  that  Astyages  had  no  male  offspring  (i.,  109). 

*  "Speaker's  Commentary"  on  Dan.  v.  31. 


NOTICES  IN  DANIEL.  131 

the  Chaldees  ;  we  must  view  it  either  as  resulting  from 
Oriental  ostentation,  or  as  an  anticipation  of  the  maxim, 
Divide  et  impera.  Each  "satrap"  must  have  ruled 
over  a  comparatively  small  district.  They  may  have 
been  the  head  men  of  tribes,  and  if  so,  it  is  pertinent 
to  remark  that  the  tribes  of  the  Euphrates  valley  were 
exceedingly  numerous.  Twenty-four  tribes  of  Lower 
Babylonia  collected  on  one  occasion  to  assist  Susub;^ 
in  the  middle  region  Tiglath-Pileser  II.  claims  to  have 
reduced  thirty- four  tribes;^  the  upper  region  had  at 
least  as  many.  An  ancient  geographical  list  seems  to 
divide  Babylonia  proper  into  seventy-three  districts.^ 
If  Cyrus  intrusted  to  Darius  the  Euphrates  valley  up 
to  Carchemish,  and  the  regions  of  Coelesyria  and 
Phoenicia,  we  can  quite  understand  the  number  of  the 
"princes"  {i.e.,  satraps)  being  a  hundred  and  twenty. 

"  Now,  O  king,  establish  the  decree,  and  sign  the  writing,  that  it  be 
not  changed,  according  to  the  law  of  the  Medes  and  Persians,  which 
altereth  not." — Dan.  vi.  8. 

"Know,  O  king,  that  the  law  of  the  Medes  and  Persians  is,  That 
no  decree  nor  statute  which  the  king  establisheth  may  be  changed." 
— Ver.  15. 

The  inviolability  of  Medo-Persian  law,  and  the  moral 
impossibility  that  the  king,  having  signed  a  decree,  or 
in  any  way  pledged  his  word  to  a  matter,  could  after- 
wards retract,  or  alter  it,  which  are  so  strongly  asserted 
in  these  passages,  and  again  so  markedly  implied  in 
the   Book   of    Esther,  receive   illustration    from   two 

^  "  Records  of  the  Past,"  vol.  i.,  p.  47. 

2 Ibid.,  vol.  v.,  p.  loi.  **Ibid.,  vol.  v.,  pp.  105-7. 


132 


BAB  FLOAT  AND  EG  YPT. 


narratives  which  have  come  down  to  us  on  the 
authority  of  Herodotus.  "  Cambyses,"  he  tells  us/ 
"  the  son  of  Cyrus,  was  anxious  to  marry  one  of  his 
sisters ;  but,  as  he  knew  that  it  was  an  uncommon 
thing,  and  not  the  custom  of  the  Persians  previously, 
he  summoned  a  meeting  of  the  royal  judges,  and  put 
the  question  to  them,  whether  there  was  any  law 
which  allowed  a  brother,  if  he  wished  it,  to  marry  his 
sister?  Now  the  royal  judges,"  he  remarks,  "are 
certain  picked  men  among  the  Persians,  who  hold  their 
office  for  life,  or  until  they  are  found  guilty  of  some 
misconduct.  By  them  justice  is  administered  in  Persia, 
and  they  are  the  interpreters  of  the  old  laws,  all  dis- 
puted cases  of  law  being  referred  to  their  decision. 
When  Cambyses,  therefore,  put  his  question  to  these 
judges,  they  gave  him  an  answer  which  was  at  once 
true  and  safe — '  the}^  did  not  find  any  law,'  they  said, 
'  allowing  a  brother  to  take  his  sister  to  wife  ;  but  they 
found  a  law  that  the  king  of  the  Persians  might  do 
whatever  he  pleased.'  And  so  they  neither  warped 
the  law  through  fear  of  Cambyses,  nor  ruined  them- 
selves by  over-stiffly  maintaining  the  law;  but  they 
brought  another  quite  distinct  law  to  the  king's  help, 
which  allowed  him  to  have  his  wish.  Cambyses, 
therefore,  married  the  object  of  his  love ;  and  no  long 
time  afterwards  he  took  to  wife  also  another  sister." 
Still  more  closely  illustrative  of  the  perplexity  of 
Darius,  and  his  inability  to  escape  from  the  entangle- 
ment in  which  he  found  himself,  is  the  following 
1  Ilerod.  hi.,  31. 


NOTICES  IN  DANIEL. 


133 


anecdote  concerning  Xerxes,  one  of  the  most  self- 
willed  and  despotic  of  all  the  Persian  monarchs : 
"Amestris,  the  wife  of  Xerxes,  having  a  cause  of 
quarrel,  as  she  thought,  against  the  wife  of  a  Persian 
prince  named  Masistes,  determined  to  compass  her 
death.  She  waited,  therefore,  till  her  husband  gave 
the  great  royal  banquet — a  feast  which  took  place 
once  every  year — in  celebration  of  the  king's  birthday, 
and  then  made  request  of  Xerxes  that  he  would  please 
to  give  her,  as  her  present,  the  wife  of  Masistes.  But 
he  at  first  refused ;  for  it  seemed  to  him  shocking  and 
monstrous  to  give  into  the  power  of  another  a  woman 
who  was  not  only  his  brother's  wife,  but  was  likewise 
wholly  guiltless  in  the  matter  which  had  enraged 
Amestris ;  and  he  was  the  more  unwilling  inasmuch 
as  he  well  knew  the  intention  with  which  his  wife  had 
preferred  her  request.  After  a  time,  however,  he  was 
wearied  by  her  importunity,  and, /*^£'/z;;^  constrained  by 
the  lazu  of  the  feast,  which  required  that  no  one  who 
asked  a  boon  that  day  at  the  king's  board  should  be 
denied  his  request,  he  yielded,  but  with  a  very  ill  will, 
and  gave  the  woman  into  her  power."  ^  Amestris,  as 
he  had  expected,  caused  the  woman  to  be  put  to 
death,  first  mutilating  her  in  a  most  barbarous  manner. 
It  is  indicative  of  the  complete  knowledge  that  the 
writer  has  of  the  change  which  Babylon  underwent 
when  she  passed  from  the  uncontrolled  despotism  of 
the  old  native  kings  to  the  comparatively  limited 
monarchy  of  Persia  that  he  exhibits  to  us  Nebuchad- 

*  Herod.,  ix.  no,  in. 


134  BAB  YL  ON  AND  E G  YPT. 

nezzar  and  Belshazzar  as  wholly  unrestrained  by  those 
about  them,  or  admitting,  at  the  most,  domestic 
counsels,  while  he  represents  Darius  as  trammelled  by 
Medo-Persian  law,  a  passive,  instrument  in  the  hands 
of  his  councillors,  forced  to  do  an  act  against  which 
his  soul  revolted,  and  only  venturing  upon  a  vindica- 
tion of  his  own  authority  when  he  had  been  the  witness 
of  a  stupendous  miracle  (ch.  vi.  14-24). 

"  The  king  spake  and  said  unto  Daniel,  O  Daniel,  servant  of  the 
living  God,  is  thy  God,  whom  thou  servest  continually,  able  to  deliver 
thee  from  the  lions?" — Dan.  vi.  20. 

"Then  King  Darius  wrote  unto  all  people,  nations,  and  languages, 
that  dwell  in  all  the  earth :  Peace  be  multiplied  unto  you,  I  make  a 
decree,  That  in  every  dominion  of  my  kingdom  men  tremble  and  fear 
before  the  God  of  Daniel :  for  He  is  the  living  God,  and  steadfast  for 
ever,  and  His  kingdom  that  which  shall  not  be  destroyed,  and  His 
dominion  shall  be  even  unto  the  end.  He  delivereth  and  rescueth,  and 
He  worketh  signs  and  wonders  in  heaven  and  earth,  who  hath  deliv- 
ered Daniel  from  the  power  of  the  lions;" — Dan.  vi.  25-27. 

As  the  Medo-Persic  kings  introduced  some  novelty 
into  the  political  situation  when  they  became  the  rulers 
of  Babylon,  so  they  further  introduced  a  more  consid- 
erable religious  change.  The  ordinary  Babylonian 
system  is  sufficiently  indicated  in  the  account  of 
Belshazzar's  feast.  It  was  grossly  polytheistic  and 
idolatrous.  It  recognised  a  hierarchy  of  gods  as 
ruling  in  the  heavenly  sphere,^  and  it  worshipped  them 
under  the  form  of  images  ^  in  gold,  and  silver,  and 
brass,  and  iron,  and  wood,  and  stone  (ch.  vi.  4,  23). 

^  "Ancient  Monarchies,"  vol.  i.,  pp.  110-I42;  vol.  iii.,  pp.  25-33. 
2  Ibid.,  vol.  iii.,  p.  28. 


NOTICES  IN  DANIEL. 


135 


The  religion  of  the  Medo-Persians  was  very  different. 
It  admitted  of  no  use  of  images.^  It  did  not  abso- 
lutely reject  the  employment  of  the  word  god  in 
the  plural ;  ^  but  it  acknowledged  one  god  as  infinitely 
superior  to  all  others,  and  viewed  him  as  alone  truly 
"  living,"  as  alone  the  fount  and  origin  of  all  life, 
whether  earthly  or  spiritual.  The  Ahura-Mazda  of  the 
Medes  and  Persians  was  a  god  of  a  very  spiritual  and 
exalted  character.  He  had  made  the  celestial  bodies, 
earth,  water,  and  trees,  all  good  creatures,  and  all  good, 
true  things.  He  was  good,  holy,  pure,  true,  the  holy 
god,  the  holiest,  the  essence  of  truth,  the  father  of  all 
truth,  the  best  being  of  all,  the  master  of  purity.  He 
was  supremely  happy,  possessing  every  blessing — 
health,  wealth,  virtue,  wisdom,  immortality.^ 

These  facts,  which  are  known  to  us  especially 
through  the  Zendavesta,  the  sacred  book  of  the  ancient 
Medes  and  Persians,  throw  considerable  light  on  the 
picture  drawn  of  the  religion  of  the  Babylonian  court 
under  Darius  the  Mede,  compared  with  that  of  the 
same  court  almost  immediately  before,  under  Belshaz- 
zar.  Belshazzar  allowed  that  "  the  spirit  of  the  holy 
gods''  might  be  in  Daniel,  and  that  therefore  his  words 
might  be  deserving  of  attention.  He  praised  "the 
gods,"  and  recognised  the  duty  of  worshipping  them 
as  embodied  in  their  images  of  wood  and  stone  and 
metal.     In   the   account  given   of  Darius  the   Mede, 

1  Herod.,  i.  131. 

2 See  Pusey's  "Lectures  on  Daniel,"  pp.  529-539. 

2  "Ancient  Monarchies,"  vol.  ii.,  pp.  324-5. 


136  BAB YL ON  AND  EGYPT. 

idolatry  has,  on  the  other  hand,  no  place.  Polytheism 
of  a  kind  just  makes  its  appearance  in  the  expression, 
"  Whosoever  shall  ask  a  petition  oi  any  god''  (ch.  vi.  7, 
12);  but  monotheism  is  predominant.  Darius,  before 
knowing  if  a  miracle  has  been  performed  or  no,  recog- 
nises Daniel  as  a  "  servant  oi  the  living  God''  (ver.  20); 
and  afterwards,  when  assured  of  Daniel's  deliverance, 
praises  and  exalts  *'  the  living  God  "  as  one  "  who  is 
steadfast  for  ever  and  ever,"  whose  "  kingdom  shall 
not  be  destroyed,"  but  shall  continue  "  even  unto  the 
end ; "  '*  who  delivereth  and  rescueth,"  and  "  worketh 
signs  and  wonders  in  heaven  and  earth"  (vers.  26,  27). 
These  words,  which  would  seem  strange  in  the  mouth 
of  most  heathens,  are  natural  enough  in  those  of  a 
Zoroastrian,  who,  while  allowing  a  certain  qualified 
worship  of  the  sun,  and  of  the  gods  presiding  over 
his  own  family,^  would  recognise  as  infinitely  above 
these,  placed  in  a  category  apart  and  by  himself,  the 
great  giver  of  life,  Ahura-Mazda,  the  true  "  living 
God,"  the  Creator,  the  Preserver,  the  Deliverer  from 
evil,  the  Supreme  Spirit,  to  whom  all  others  were 
subordinate,  the  one  and  only  ruler  of  heaven  and 
earth. 

It  does  not  interfere  with  this  view  that  Cyrus,  and 
as  his  vice-gerent,  Darius,  tolerated — nay,  even  patron- 
ized to  some  extent — the  Babylonian  religion.^  This 
they  did  as  politic  rulers  over  subjects  likely  to  be 

^  "  Behist.  Inscript.,"  col.  iv.,  par.  12,  13;  Pusey's  "  Daniel,"  p.  531, 
note  8. 

^  "Journal  of  the  Royal  Asiatic  Society,"  vol.  xii.,  pp.  88-9. 


NOTICES  IN  DANIEL.  137 

disaffected.  But  in  their  courts,  among  their  privy- 
councillors,  they  would  act  differently.  There  they 
would  show  their  true  feelings.  Even  in  a  proclama- 
tion addressed  to  all  their  subjects,  as  that  of  Darius 
was  (ver.  25),  they  would  not  scruple  to  show  their 
own  feelings — as  Darius  Hystaspis  and  his  successors 
did  in  all  their  rock-inscriptions — so  long  as  they 
abstained  from  any  direct  disparagement  of  their 
subjects'  gods,  and  merely  required  the  acknowledg- 
ment of  an  additional  deity  besides  those  of  the 
popular  Pantheons. 


CHAPTER   XL 

NOTICES    OF    BABYLON     IN     DANIEL,     ISAIAH,    JERE- 
MIAH,   AND    EZEKIEL. 

It  is  proposed  in  the  present  chapter  to  bring  together 
the  scattered  notices  in  Scripture  bearing  upon  the 
general  condition  of  Babylon,  the  character  of  its 
government,  and  the  manners  and  customs  of  its 
people  ;  and  to  inquire  how  far  profane  history  con- 
firms or  illustrates  what  Scripture  tells  us  on  these 
matters.  A  certain  number  of  the  points  have  necessa- 
rily been  touched  in  some  of  the  earlier  chapters  of  the 
present  volume,  and  thus  it  will  be  impossible  to  avoid 
a  certain  amount  of  repetition ;  but  the  endeavour 
will  be  made  to  pass  lightly  over  such  topics  as  have 
been  already  put  before  the  reader,  and  thus  to  reduce 
the  repetition  to  a  minimum. 

We  have  noticed  indirectly,  in  connection  with  its 
commerce,  the  great  wealth  of  Babylon.  Isaiah  calls 
it  emphatically  '*  the  golden  city  "  (Isa.  xiv.  4),  or  "  the 
exactress  of  gold,"  as  the  passage  may  be  rendered 
literally.  Jeremiah  compares  Babylon  to  "a  golden 
cup  in  the  hand  of  the  Lord  "  (Jer.  li.  7),  and  calls  her 
"  abundant  in  treasures  "  (ib.  ver.  13),  declaring  more- 


NO  TICES  IN  DA  NIEL,  ISA  I  AH,  ETC.  139 

over  that,  at  her  fall,  all  those  who  partook  of  her 
spoil  should  be  "satisfied"  (ib.  1.  10).  In  Daniel  the 
Babylonian  kingdom  is  typified  by  the  "head  of  gold" 
(Dan.  ii.  38),  and  the  opulence  of  the  monarch  is 
shown  by  the  enormous  size  of  the  image,  or  rather 
pillar,  of  gold  which  he  set  up,  a  pillar  ninety  feet 
high  by  nine  feet  wide  (ib.  iii.  i).  The  inscriptions  are 
in  accordance.  Nebuchadnezzar  tells  us  that  he 
brought  into  the  treasury  of  Merodach  at  Babylon 
*'  wares,  and  ornaments  for  the  women,  silver,  molten 
gold,  precious  stones,  metal,  itmritgana  and  cedar 
wood,  a  splendid  abundance,  riches  and  sources  of 
joy."^  The  temple  of  Merodach  he  "made  conspicu- 
ous with  fine  linen,  and  covered  its  seats  with  splendid 
gold,  with  lapis  lazuli,  and  blocks  of  alabaster."^  Its 
portico  "with  brilliant  gold  he  caused  men  to  cover; 
the  lower  threshold,  the  cedar  awnings  with  gold  and 
precious  stones  he  embellished."^  And  the  rest  of 
his  sacred  buildings  were  adorned  similarly.* 

The  primary  source  of  the  wealth  of  Babylon  was 
its  agriculture.  Herodotus  tells  us  that  the  yield  of 
grain  was  commonly  two  hundred-fold,  and  in  some 
instances  three  hundred-fold.^  Pliny  asserts  that  the 
wheat-crop  was  reaped  twice,  and  afterwards  afforded 
good  keep  for  beasts.^  When  Babylonia  became  a 
province  of  the  Persian  Empire,  it  paid  a  tribute  of  a 
thousand   talents    of   silver,"   and   at   the   same   time 

1"  Records  of  the  Past,"  vol.  v.,  pp.  116-7.  2j]-,i(]^  p   uy^ 

3  Ibid.,  pp.  119-20.  *Ibid.,  vol.  vii.,  pp.  72,  75-6. 

^ Herod.,  i.  193.  ^Plin.  H.N.,  xviii.  17.  ''Herod.,  iii.  92. 


I40  BAB  YL  ON  AND  E G  YPT. 

furnished  the  entire  provision  of  the  court  during  one- 
third  of  the  year.^  Notwithstanding  these  calls  upon 
them,  its  satraps  became  enormously  wealthy.^  To 
the  wealth  obtained  by  agriculture  is  to  be  added  that 
derived  from  commerce,  and  from  conquest.  Both  of 
these  points  have  already  engaged  our  attention,  and 
we  have  seen  reason  to  believe  that  the  gains  made 
were  in  each  case  very  great.  Scripture  makes  allu- 
sion to  the  agricultural  wealth  of  the  country,  when  it 
enumerates  among  the  chief  calamities  of  the  final 
invasion  the  "  cutting  off  of  the  sower,  and  of  him 
that  handled  the  sickle  in  the  time  of  harvest"  (Jer.  1. 
16);  and  again  when  it  makes  special  mention  of  the 
"opening  of  the  granaries"  as  a  feature  in  the  sack  of 
the  city  (ib.  ver.  26).  The  commercial  wealth  is 
implied  in  the  description  of  Babylon  as  "  a  city  of 
merchants"  (Ezek.  xvii.  4),  and  of  Babylonia  as  **a 
land  of  trafifick"  (ib.).  The  wealth  derived  from  con- 
quest receives  notice  in  the  statement  of  Habakkuk, 
"Because  thou  hast  spoiled  many  nations,  all  the 
remnant  of  the  people  shall  spoil  thee"  (Hab.  ii.  8), 
and  is  illustrated  by  the  narrative  of  Kings  (2  Kings 
XXV.  13-17).  Nebuchadnezzar  alludes  to  it  when  he 
says,  "A  palace  for  my  royalty  in  the  midst  of  the 
city  of  Babylon  I  built  .  .  .  tall  cedars  for  its  porticoes 
I  fitted  .  .  .  with  silver,  gold,  and  precious  stones  I 
overlaid  its  gates  .  .  .  /  valiantly  collected' spoils ;  as 
an  adornment  of  the  house  were  they  arranged  and 
collected  within  it ;  trophies,  abundance,  royal  treas- 
1  Herod.,  i.  192.  2 1\;^^^ 


NOTICES  [N  DANIEL,  ISAIAH,  ETC.  141 


ures,  I  accumulated  and  gathered  together;"^  and 
again,  ''Gatherings  from  great  Imtds  I  made ;  and,  like 
the  hills,  I  upraised  its  head."^ 

Among  the  spoil  which  was  regarded  as  of  especial 
value  were  scented  woods,  more  particularly  cedars, 
and  perhaps  pines,  from  Lebanon  and  Amanus.  Isaiah, 
in  describing  the  general  rejoicing  at  the  fall  of  the 
Babylonian  Empire,  remarks,  "The  whole  earth  is  at 
rest  and  is  quiet;  they  break  forth  into  singing:  yea, 
the  fir-trees  rejoice  at  thee,  and  the  cedars  of  Lebanon, 
saying.  Since  thou  art  laid  down,  no  feller  is  come  up 
against  us"  (Isa.  xiv.  7,  8).  The  cuneiform  inscrip- 
tions show  that  the  practice  of  cutting  timber  in  the 
Syrian  mountains  and  conveying  it  to  Mesopotamia, 
which  had  been  begun  by  the  Assyrian  monarchs  (2 
Kings  xix.  23),  was  continued  by  the  Babylonians. 
Nebuchadnezzar  expressly  states  that  "  the  best  of  his 
pine-trees  front  Lebanon,  with  tall  babil-wood,  he 
brought;"^  and  Nabonidus  tells  us  that,  in  his  third 
year,  he  went  to  "Amananu,  a  mountainous  country, 
where  tall  pines  grew,  and  brought  a  part  of  them  to 
the  midst  of  Babylon."^ 

The  great  size  of  Babylon,  and  the  immense  height 
and  thickness  of  its  walls,  have  been  dwelt  upon  at 
some  length  in  a  former  chapter.^  Jeremiah  is  par- 
ticularly clear  upon  these  points,  though,  naturally,  he 

1  "Records  of  the  Past,"  vol.  v.,  p.  131, 

2  Ibid.,  p.  133.  3  Ibid.,  vol.  v.,  p.  119. 
*"  Transactions  of  the  Bibl.  Archseolog.  Society,"  vol.  vii.,  p.  154. 
^See  above,  ch.  vi. 


142  BAB  YL ON  AND  EG  YPT. 

enters  into  no  details.  "Though  Babylon  should 
mount  lip  to  heaven,''  he  says,  ''and  though  she  should 
fortify  the  height  of  her  strength,  yet  from  me  shall 
spoilers  come  unto  her,  saith  the  Lord"  (Jer.  li.  53); 
and  again,  "The  broad  walls  of  Babylon  shall  be 
utterly  broken,  and  her  high  gates  shall  be  burned 
with  fire"  (ib.  ver.  58);  and,  with  respect  to  the  size 
of  the  city,  "  One  post  shall  run  to  meet  another,  and 
one  messenger  to  meet  another,  to  show  the  king  of 
Babylon  that  his  city  is  taken  at  one  end"  (ib.  ver.  31). 
The  government  of  Babylon  by  a  despotic  monarch, 
the  sole  source  of  all  power  and  authority,  and  the 
absolute  master  of  the  lives  and  liberties  of  his  sub- 
jects, which  the  Babylonian  notices  in  Scripture  set 
before  us  consistently,  and  which  appears  most  mark- 
edly in  Daniel  (ch.  ii.  12,  48,  49;  iii.  6,  15,  29),  is  in 
complete  accordance  with  all  that  profane  history 
teaches  on  the  subject.  Nebuchadnezzar  claims  in 
his  inscriptions  to  rule  by  Divine  right.  The  sceptre 
of  righteousness  is  delivered  into  his  hand  that  there- 
with he  may  sustain  men.^  From  him  alone  com- 
mands issue ;  by  him  alone  all  works  are  accomplished. 
No  subject  obtains  any  mention  as  even  helping  him. 
The  inscriptions  of  Neriglissar  and  Nabonidus  are  of 
nearly  the  same  character.  And  the  classical  accounts 
agree.  It  is  clear  that  in  Semitic  Babylon,  prior  to 
the  Medo- Persic  conquest,  there  was  no  noble  class 
possessing  independent  power,  or  any  right  of  con- 
trolling the  king. 

1  "  Records  of  the  Tast,"  vol.  v.,  p.  114. 


NOTICES  IN  DANIEL,  ISAIAH,  ETC.  143 

There  was,  however,  a  learned  class,  which  pos- 
sessed a  certain  distinction,  which  furnished  priests  to 
the  chief  temples,  and  claimed  to  interpret  dreams  and 
omens,  and  to  foretell  the  future  by  means  of  astrology. 
Herodotus  ^  and  Diodorus  ^  give  this  class  the  name 
of  "  Chaldseans,"  a  nomenclature  with  which  the  Book 
of  Daniel  may  be  said  to  agree,  if  we  accept  the 
identification  of  "  Chaldaeans  "  v/ith  Casdim.  At  any 
rate,  the  book  testifies  to  the  existence  of  the  class, 
and  to  the  functions  which  belonged  to  it,  as  also 
does  Isaiah,  when  he  says  of  Babylon,  "  Let  now  the 
astrologers,  the  star-gazers,  the  monthly  prognosti- 
cators,  stand  up  and  save  thee  from  these  things  which 
shall  come  upon  thee  "  (Isa.  xlvii.  13).  The  title  Rab- 
Mag,  which  may  be  suspected  to  have  belonged  to 
the  chief  of  the  Chaldaean  order,  is  found  both  in 
Scripture  (Jer.  xxxix.  3,  13)  and  in  the  inscriptions. 
It  has  been  translated  "chief  of  the  Magi;"^  but  there 
seems  to  be  no  reason  to  believe  that  Magianism  was 
in  any  way  recognised  by  the  Babylonians  of  the 
independent  empire. 

There  was  also  in  Babylonia  a  numerous  class  of 
officials — a  "  bureaucracy,"  as  it  has  been  called — 
whereby  the  government  of  the  country  was  actually 
carried  on.  In  some  places,  the  native  sovereigns 
were  indeed  allowed  to  retain  their  authority  for  a 
time  (2  Kings  xxiv.  i,  17),  and  the  Babylonian  monarch 
could  thus  be  called  with  propriety  a  ''king  of  kings" 

1  Herod.,  i.  181,  183.  2  Diod.  Sic,  ii.  29. 

^  Speaker's  Commentary  on  Jeremiah,  xxxix.  3. 


144  ^^B  ^L  ^^  ^^^  ^^  ^Pl^' 


(Dan.  ii.  37 ;  Ezek.  xxvi.  7) ;  but  the  general  system 
was  to  replace  kings  by  "  governors  "  (2  Kings  xxv. 
22,  23  ;  Berosus,  Fr.  14)  or  "princes  "  (Dan.  ii.  2),  and 
to  employ  under  these  last  a  great  variety  of  subor- 
dinates. The  Babylonian  contract  tablets  show  at 
least  eight  or  ten  names  of  officers  under  government, 
of  different  ranks  and  gradations/  correspondent  (in  a 
general  way)  to  the  "  princes,  governors,  captains, 
judges,  treasurers,  counsellors,  sheriffs,  and  rulers  of 
provinces  "  of  the  Book  of  Daniel,  and  thus  indicate 
sufficiently  the  bureaucratic  character  of  the  govern- 
ment. 

The  general  character  of  the  Babylonian  court  as 
depicted  in  Daniel,  and  its  agreement  with  what  we 
know  from  other  sources,  has  been  already  noticed. 
But  the  following  illustrations  may  be  added  to  those 
already  given.  The  high  position  of  the  queen- 
mother  at  the  court  of  Belshazzar  receives  illustration 
from  the  mention  of  "  the  mother  of  the  king  "  in  the 
tablet  of  Nabonidus,  and  from  the  fact  that  at  her 
death  there  was  a  court  mourning  of  three  days' 
duration.^  The  polygamy  of  the  monarchs  (Dan.  v. 
2,  3)  accords  with  what  we  hear  of  the  "  concubines  " 
of  Saul-Mugina.^  The  employment  of  eunuchs  (2 
Kings  XX.  10;  Dan.  i.  3)  agrees  with  Herod,  iii.  92; 
that  of  music  (Isa.  xiv.  1 1 ;  Dan.  iii.  5,  7)  with  passages 

*  "Records  of  the  Past,"  vol.  ix.,  pp.  91-108;  vol.  xi.,  pp.  91-8. 
'  "  Transactions   of   the   Bibl.  Archaeolog.   Society,"  vol.  vii.,  pp. 
158-9. 
•''"  Records  of  the  Past,"  vol.  i.,  p.  77. 


NOTICES  IN  DANIEL,  ISAIAH,  ETC.  145 

in  the  Assyrian  inscriptions,  which  speak  of  musicians 
and  musical  instruments  as  in  vogue  at  the  courts  of 
other  neighbouring  kings  ;^  that  of  "sweet  odours"  in 
the  way  of  religious  service  (Dan.  ii.  46)  with  v/hat 
Herodotus  relates  of  the  burning  of  frankincense  on 
sacrificial  occasions.^  The  long  detention  in  prison 
of  offenders  against  the  dignity  of  the  crown,  of  which 
Isaiah  speaks,  when  he  says  of  the  Babylonian 
monarch  that  he  "  opened  not  the  door  of  his  prisoners  " 
(Isa.  xiv.  17),  and  which  is  exemplified  by  the  confine- 
ment of  Jehoiachin  by  Nebuchadnezzar  for  the  extra- 
ordinary term  of  thirty-seven  years  (2  Kings  xxv.  27), 
receives  illustration  from  the  story  of  Parsondas,  as 
told  by  Nicolas  of  Damascus.  Parsondas  was  a  Mede, 
who  desired  to  become  king  of  Babylon  under  Artseus, 
and  obtained  from  him  the  promise  of  the  kingdom. 
Nannarus,  the  actual  monarch,  hearing  of  it,  got  Par- 
sondas into  his  power,  and  kept  him  a  prisoner  at  his 
court  for  seven  years,  even  then  releasing  him,  not  of 
his  own  free-will,  but  on  the  application  of  Artaeus, 
and  under  the  apprehension  that,  if  he  refused,  Artaeus 
would  make  war  upon  him,  and  deprive  him  of  his 
sovereignty.^ 

One  of  the  most  surprising  points  in  the  represen- 
tation of  Babylonian  customs  which  the  Scriptural 
account  of  the  people  brings  before  us  is  the  severity 
and  abnormal  character  of  the  punishments  which  were 
in  use  among  them.     To  burn  men  to  death  in  a 

*"  Records  of  the  Past,"  vol.  ix.,  pp.  54,  55. 

2  Herod.,  i.  183.  ^  Nic.  Darn.,  Fr.  Ii. 


146  BAB  YL ON  AND  EG  YPT. 

furnace  of  fire,  as  Nebuchadnezzar  proposed  to  do 
with  Shadrach,  Meshach,  and  Abed-nego  (Dan.  iii.  15- 
23),  is  so  extraordinary  a  proceeding  as  to  seem,  at 
first  sight,  well-nigh  incredible.  To  have  men  ''  cut  to 
pieces,"  which  was  the  threat  held  out  by  the  same 
monarch  on  two  occasions  (Dan.  ii.  5  ;  iii.  29),  is 
almost  as  remarkable  a  mode  of  executing  them.  It 
might  mitigate,  perhaps,  the  feeling  of  incredulity 
with  which  the  ordinary  European  hears  of  such 
terrible  punishments  to  call  attention  to  the  punitive 
systems  of  other  Oriental  kingdoms.  Take,  for 
instance,  the  practice  of  the  Persians : — 

"We  may  notice  as  a  blot  upon  the  Persian  system  and  character" 
(I  have  elsewhere  observed)  "  the  cruelty  and  barbarity  which  was 
exhibited  in  the  regular  and  legal  punishments  which  were  assigned  to 
crimes  and  offences.  The  criminal  code  was  exceedingly  severe.  The 
modes  of  execution  were  also,  for  the  most  part,  unnecessarily  cruel. 
Prisoners  were  punished  by  having  their  heads  placed  upon  a  broad 
stone,  and  then  having  their  faces  crushed,  and  their  brains  beaten  out, 
by  repeated  blows  with  another  stone.  Ravlshers  and  rebels  were  put 
to  death  by  cnicifixion.  The  horrible  punishment  of  '  the  boat '  seems 
to  have  been  no  individual  tyrant's  conception,  but  a  recognised  and 
legal  form  of  execution.  The  same  may  be  said  also  of  burying  alive. 
And  the  Pereian  secondary  punishments  were  also,  for  the  most  part, 
exceedingly  barbarous."  ^ 

But,  besides  this,  there  is  direct  evidence  that  the 
actual  punishments  mentioned  as  in  use  among  the 
Babylonians  of  Nebuchadnezzar's  time  were  known  to 
the  Mesopotamians  of  the  period,  and  were  upon 
occasions  applied  to  criminals.     Asshur-bani-pal,  the 

^  *'  Ancient  Monarchies,"  vol.  iii.,  pp.  246-7. 


NOTICES  IN  DANIEL,  ISAIAH,  ETC.  147 

son  of  Esar-haddon,  declares,  with  respect  to  Saul- 
Mugina,  his  own  brother,  whom  he  had  made  king  of 
Babylon,  but  who  had  revolted  against  him — "  Saul- 
Mugina,  my  rebellious  brother,  who  made  war  with 
me,  hi  the  fierce,  burning  fire  they  threzv  him,  and 
destroyed  his  life."  ^  Of  another  rebel,  Dunanu, 
chief  of  the  Gambalu,  he  also  states — "  Dunanu  in 
Nineveh,  over  afiir^iace  they  placed  him,  and  consumed 
him  entirely!'  ^  Nay,  so  natural  does  he  consider  it 
that  rebels  should,  when  taken,  suffer  death  in  this 
way,  that,  when  he  has  to  notice  the  escape  of  a  certain 
number  of  Saul-Mugina's  adherents,  who  had  betaken 
themselves  to  flight,  he  expresses  himself  thus — "  The 
people,  whom  Saul-Mugina,  my  rebellious  brother,  had 
caused  to  join  him,  and  who,  for  their  evil  deeds, 
deserved  death  .  .  .  they  did  not  burn  in  the  fire  with 
Saul-Mugina  their  lord  "  ^ — implying  that,  if  they  had 
been  caught,  this  would  have  been  the  mode  of  their 
execution.  Again,  of  other  rebels,  kept  apparently 
in  some  stone-quarries  from  the  time  of  Sennacherib, 
his  grandfather,  Asshur-bani-pal  tells  us,  "  I  threw 
those  men  again  into  that  pit ;  /  cut  off  their  limbs^ 
and  caused  them  to  be  eaten  by  dogs,  bears,  eagles, 
vultures,  birds  of  heaven,  and  fishes  of  the  deep."  ^ 

The  liberty  and  publicity  allowed  to  women  in 
Babylonia,  so  contrary  to  usual  Oriental  custom,  which 
appears  in  the  Book  of  Daniel  (ch.  v.  2,  3,  10),  is 
illustrated  by  the  traditions  concerning  Semiramis  and 

1 "  Records  of  the  Past,"  vol.  i.,  p.  77.  2  ib}(j^  vol.  ix.,  p.  56. 

3  Ibid.,  vol.  i.,  1.  s.  c.  *  Ibid.,  p.  78. 


148  BAB  YL  ON  AND  E G  YPT. 


Nitocris,  and  also  by  the  account,  which  Herodotus 
gives,  of  certain  Babylonian  customs  of  a  very  unusual 
character.  "  Once  a  year,"  Herodotus  tells  us,  "  the 
marriageable  maidens  of  every  village  in  the  country 
were  required  to  assemble  together  into  one  place, 
while  all  the  men  stood  round  them  in  a  circle.  Then 
a  herald  (cf.  Dan.  iii.  4)  called  up  the  damsels  one  by 
one  and  offered  them  for  sale  .  .  .  All  who  liked 
might  come  even  from  distant  villages  and  bid  for  the 
women."  ^  Again  he  says,  "  The  Babylonians  have 
one  most  shameful  custom.  Every  woman  born  in 
the  country  must,  once  in  her  life,  go  and  sit  down  in 
the  precinct  of  Venus  and  there  consort  with  a  stranger. 
Many  of  the  wealthier  sort,  who  are  too  proud  to  mix 
with  the  others,  drive  in  covered  carriages  to  the 
precinct,  followed  by  a  goodly  train  of  attendants,  and 
there  take  their  station.  Where  they  sit  there  is 
always  a  great  crowd,  some  coming  and  others  going. 
Lines  of  cord  mark  out  paths  in  all  directions  ;  and 
the  strangers  pass  along  them  to  make  their  choice. 
.  .  .  Some  women  have  remained  three  or  four  years 
in  the  precinct."^  The  statements  of  Herodotus  on 
these  points  are  confirmed  by  other  writers,  and  there 
is  ample  reason  to  believe  that  the  seclusion  of  the  sex, 
so  general  in  other  parts  of  the  East,  was  abhorrent 
to  Babylonian  ideas.^ 

The  free  use  of  wine  in  Babylonia,  not  only  at  royal 
banquets  (Dan.  v.  1-4),  but  in  the  ordinary  diet  of  the 

*  Herod.,  i.,  196.  ^jbid.,  i.  199. 

'See  the  author's  "Ancient  Monarchies,"  vol,  iii.,  p.  22. 


NOTICES  IN  DANIEL,  ISAIAH,  ETC.  149 

upper  classes  (ib.  i.  5-16),  is  what  we  should  scarcely 
have  expected  in  so  hot  a  region,  and  one  wholly 
unsuited  for  the  cultivation  of  the  vine.  Yet  it  is 
quite  certain  from  profane  sources  that  the  fact  was  as 
represented  in  Scripture.  Herodotus  tells  us  of  a 
regular  trade  between  Armenia  and  Babylon  down  the 
course  of  the  Euphrates,  in  which  the  boats  used 
were  sometimes  of  as  much  as  five  thousand  talents 
burden.^  He  declares  that  the  staple  of  the  trade  was 
wine,  which,  not  being  produced  in  the  country,  was 
regularly  imported  from  abroad  year  after  year.  In 
the  story  of  Parsondas  we  find  Nannarus  abundantly 
supplied  with  wine,  and  liberal  in  its  use.^  The 
Chaldsean  account  of  the  Deluge  represents  Hasis- 
adra  as  collecting  it  "  in  receptacles,  like  the  waters  of 
a  river,"  for  the  benefit  of  those  who  were  about  to 
enter  the  ark,^  and  as  pouring  "  seven  jugs  "  of  it  in 
libation,  when,  on  the  subsidence  of  the  waters,  he 
quitted  his  shelter.*  Quintus  Curtius  relates  that  the 
Babylonians  of  Alexander's  time  were  fond  of  drinking 
wine  to  excess ;  their  banquets  were  magnificent,  and 
generally  ended  in  drunkenness."^ 

The  employment  of  war-chariots  by  the  Babylo- 
nians, which  is  asserted  by  Jeremiah  (Jer.  iv.  13;  1.  37), 
in  marked  contrast  with  his  descriptions  of  the  Medo- 
Persians,  who  are  represented  as  "riders  upon  horses'* 
(ib.  ver.  42 ;  compare  ch.  li.  27),  receives  confirmation 

1  Herod,,  i.  194.  ^ggg  jsjic.  Dam.,  Fr.  il. 

3  "  Records  of  the  Past,"  vol.  vii,,  p.  137. 

*Ibid.,  p.  140.  ^  Q.  Curt.,  v.  i. 


150  BAB  YL  ON  AND  E  G  YFT. 

from  the  Assyrian  inscriptions,  which  repeatedly 
mention  the  chariot  force  as  an  important  part  of  the 
Babylonian  army/  and  is  also  noticed  by  Polyhistor.^ 
Their  skill  with  the  bow,  also  noted  by  the  same 
prophet  (ch.  iv.  29;  v.  16;  vi.  23  ;  li.  3),  has  the  support 
of  yEschylus,^  and  is  in  accordance  with  the  monu- 
ments, which  show  us  the  bow  as  the  favourite  weapon 
of  the  monarchs.'^ 

The  pronounced  idolatry  prevalent  in  Babylon 
under  the  later  kings,  which  Scripture  sets  forth  in 
such  strong  terms  (Jer.  1.  2,  38  ;  li.  i7,-47,  52  ;  Dan.  v. 
4),  scarcely  requires  the  confirmation  which  is  lent  to 
it  by  the  inscriptions  and  by  profane  writers.  Idola- 
trous systems  had  possession  of  all  Western  Asia  at 
the  time,  and  the  Babylonian  idolatry  was  not  of  a 
much  grosser  type  than  the  Assyrian,  the  Syrian,  or 
the  Phoenician.  But  it  is  perhaps  worthy  of  remark 
that  the  particular  phase  of  the  religion,  which  the 
great  Hebrew  prophets  set  forth,  is  exactly  that  found 
by  the  remains  to  have  characterized  the  later  empire. 
In  the  works  of  these  writers  three  Babylonian  gods 
only  are  particularised  by  name — Bel,  Nebo,  Merodach 
— and  in  the  monuments  of  the  period  these  three 
deities  are  exactly  those  which  obtain  •  the  most 
frequent  mention  and  hold  the  most  prominent  place. 


^''Records  of  the   Past,"   vol.  i.,  p.   22;   vol.  vii.,  p.  59;  vol.  xi. 
P-  55- 

2  See  the  "  Fragm.  Hist.  Grsec."  of  C.  Muller,  vol.  ii. 

^^schyl.,  "Pers.,"  1.  55. 

*  See  "  Ancient  Monarchies,"  vol.  ii.,  p.  560;  vol.  iii.,  p,  7. 


NOTICES  IN  DANIEL,  ISAIAH,  ETC.  151 

The  kings  of  the  later  empire,  with  a  single  exception, 
had  names  which  placed  them  under  the  protection  of 
one  or  other  of  these  three ;  and  their  inscriptions 
show  that  to  these  three  they  paid,  at  any  rate,  especial 
honour.  Merodach  holds  the  first  place  in  the 
memorials  of  their  reigns  left  by  Nebuchadnezzar  and 
Neriglissar ;  Bel  and  Nebo  bear  off  the  palm  in  the 
inscriptions  of  Nabonidus.  While  "  the  great  gods  " 
obtain  occasional  but  scanty  notice,  as  "  the  holy 
gods  "  do  in  the  Book  of  Daniel  (Dan.  iv.  8,  9),  Bel, 
Nebo,  and  Merodach  alone  occur  frequently,  alone 
seem  to  be  viewed,  not  as  local,  but  as  great  national 
deities,  alone  engage  the  thoughts  and  receive  the 
adoration  of  the  nation. 


CHAPTER  XII. 

FURTHER    NOTICES    OF    BABYLON    IN    ISAIAH     AND 
JEREMIAH. 

The  complete  destruction  of  Babylon,  and  her  desola- 
tion through  long  ages,  is  prophesied  in  Scripture 
repeatedly,  and  with  a  distinctness  and  minuteness 
that  are  very  remarkable.  The  most  striking  of  the 
prophecies  are  the  following: — 

**  Babylon,  the  glory  of  kingdoms,  the  beauty  of  the  Chaldees'  excel- 
lency, shall  be  as  when  God  overthrew  Sodom  and  Gomorrah.  It  shall 
never  be  inhabited,  neither  shall  it  be  dwelt  in  from  generation  to  gene- 
ration; neither  shall  the  Arabian  pitch  tent  there,  neither  shall  the 
shepherds  make  their  fold  there.  But  7mld  beasts  of  the  desert  shall  lie 
there ;  and  their  houses  shall  be  full  of  doleful  creatures ;  and  owls 
shall  d7uell  there,  and  satyrs  shall  dance  there.  And  the  wild  beasts  of 
the  islands  shall  cry  in  their  desolate  houses,  and  dragons  in  their 
pleasant  palaces ;  and  her  time  is  near  to  come ;  and  her  days  shall  not 
be  prolonged." — IsA,  xiii.  19-22. 

"  I  will  rise  up  against  them,  saith  the  Lord  of  hosts,  and  cut  off 
from  Babylon  the  name,  and  remnant,  and  son,  and  nephew,  saith  the 
Lord.  I  will  also  7nake  it  a  possession  for  the  bittern,  and  pools  of 
water ;  and  I  will  sweep  it  with  the  besom  of  destruction,  saith  the 
Lord  of  hosts." — IsA.  xiv.  22,  23. 

"  Chaldea  shall  be  a  spoil ;  all  that  spoil  her  shall  be  satisfied,  saith 
the  Lord.  Because  ye  were  glad,  because  ye  rejoiced,  O  ye  destroyers 
of  My  heritage ;  because  ye  are  giown  fat,  as  the  heifer  at  grass,  and 
152 


NOTICES  IN  ISAIAH  AND  JEREMIAH.  153 

bellow  as  bulls ;  your  mother  shall  be  sore  confounded ;  she  that  bare 
you  shall  be  ashamed ;  behold,  the  hindermost  of  the  nations  shall  be  a 
wilderness^  a  dry  landy  and  a  desert.  Because  of  the  wrath  of  the 
Lord  it  shall  not  be  inhabited^  but  it  shall  be  wholly  desolate  ;  every  one 
that  goeth  by  Babylon  shall  be  astonished,  and  hiss  at  all  her  plagues. 
Put  yourselves  in  an-ay  against  Babylon  round  about ;  all  ye  that  bend 
the  bow,  shoot  at  her,  spare  no  arrows ;  for  she  hath  sinned  against  the 
Lord.  Shout  against  her  round  about :  she  hath  given  her  hand ;  her 
foundations  are  fallen,  her  zualls  are  thrown  down  ;  for  it  is  the  ven- 
geance of  the  Lord :  take  vengeance  upon  her :  as  she  hath  done,  do 
unto  her." — Jer.  1,  10-15. 

'■'■A  drought  is  upon  her  waters;  and  they  shall  be  dried  up ;  for  it  is 
the  land  of  graven  images,  and  they  are  mad  upon  their  idols.  There- 
fore the  wild  beasts  of  the  desert,  with  the  wild  beasts  of  the  islands, 
shall  dwell  there,  and  the  owls  shall  dwell  therein  ;  and  it  shall  be  no 
more  inhabited  for  ever ;  neither  shall  it  be  dwelt  in  from  generation  to 
generation.  As  God  overthrew  Sodom  and  Gomorrah  and  the  neighbour 
cities  thereof,  saith  the  Lord,  so  shall  no  man  abide  there,  neither  shall 
any  son  of  man  dwell  therein.'' — Vers.  38-40. 

"  Thus  saith  the  Lord ;  Behold,  I  will  plead  thy  cause,  and  take 
vengeance  for  thee ;  and  /  will  dry  up  her  sea,  and  make  her  springs  dry. 
And  Babylon  shall  become  heaps,  a  dwelling-place  for  dragons,  an 
astonishment  and  a  hissing,  without  an  inhabitant.  They  shall  roar 
together  like  lions ;  they  shall  yell  as  lions'  whelps.  In  their  heat  I  will 
make  their  feasts,  and  I  will  make  them  drunken,  that  they  may  rejoice, 
and  sleep  a  perpetual  sleep,  and  not  wake,  saith  the  Lord.  I  will  bring 
them  down  like  lambs  to  the  slaughter,  like  rams  with  he-goats.  How 
is  Sheshach  taken!  And  how  is  the  praise  of  the  whole  earth  sur- 
prised !  How  is  Babylon  become  an  astonishment  among  the  nations  ! 
The  sea  is  come  up  tcpon  Babylon;  she  is  covered  with  the  multitude 
of  the  waves  thereof.  Her  cities  are  a  desolation,  a  dry  land,  and  a 
wilderness,  a  land  wherein  no  man  dzvelleth,  neither  doth  any  son  of 
man  pass  thereby."— ]er.  li.  36-43- 

The  general  accuracy  of  these  descriptions  has  been 
frequently  noticed,  scarcely  a  traveller  from  the  time 


154 


BAB  YL ON  AND  EG  YPT. 


of  Pietro  della  Valle  to  the  present  day  having  failed 
to  be  struck  by  it.  But  it  seems  worth  while  to  con- 
sider, somewhat  in  detail,  the  principal  points  on 
which  the  prophetical  writers  insist,  and  to  adduce 
upon  each  of  them  the  testimony  of  modern  observers. 
First,  then,  the  foundations  of  Babylon  were  to  fall, 
her  lofty  and  broad  walls  were  to  be  thrown  down 
(Jer.  1.  15),  and  she  was  not  to  present  the  appearance 
of  a  ruined  city  at  all,  but  simply  to  "  become  heaps  " 
(ch.  li.  37).  It  is  the  constant  remark  of  travellers 
that  what  are  called  the  ruins  of  Babylon  are  simply 
a  succession  of  unsightly  mounds,  some  smaller,  some 
larger — "shapeless  heaps  of  rubbish,"^  "immense 
tumuli,"^  elevations  that  might  easily  be  mistaken  for 
natural  hills,  and  that  only  after  careful  examination 
convince  the  beholder  that  they  are  human  construc- 
tions.^ The  complete  disappearance  of  the  walls  is 
particularly  noticed;*  and  the  visitor,^  who  has  alone 
attempted  to  conjecture  the  position  which  they  occu- 
pied, can  mark  no  more  than  some  half-dozen  mounds 
along  the  line  which  he  ventures  to  assign  to  them. 
One  main  portion  of  the  ruins  is  known  to  the  Arabs 
as  the  Mujellibe,  or  "  the  Overturned,"  from  the  utter 

^Layard,  "Nineveh  and  Babylon,"  p.  491. 

2  Ker  Porter,  "Travels,"  vol.  ii.,  p.  294. 

^Ker  Porter  speaks  of  the  ruins  as  "ancient  foundations,  more 
resembling  natural  hills  in  appearance,  than  mounds  covering  the 
remains  of  fomier  great  and  splendid  edifices"  ("Travels,"  vol.  ii., 
p.  297). 

*Layard,  "Nineveh  and  Babylon,"  pp.  493,  494. 

^Oppert,  "Expedition  Scientifique  en  M6sopotamie,"  vol.  i.,  pp.  220- 
234. 


NOTICES  IN  ISAIAH  AND  JEREMIAH.  155 

confusion  that  reigns  among  the  broken  walls  and 
blocked  passages  and  deranged  bricks  of  its  interior. 
Only  a  single  fragment  of  a  building  still  erects  itself 
above  the  mass  of  rubbish  whereof  the  mounds  are 
chiefly  composed/  to  show  that  human  habitations 
really  once  stood  where  all  is  now  ruin,  decay,  and 
desolation. 

When  Babylon  was  standing  in  all  its  glory,  with 
its  great  rampart  walls  from  two  hundred  to  three 
hundred  feet  high,  with  its  lofty  palaces  and  temple- 
towers,  with  its  "  hanging  gardens,"  reckoned  one  of 
the  world's  wonders,  and  even  its  ordinary  houses 
from  three  to  four  stories  high,^  it  was  a  bold  prophecy 
that  the  whole  would  one  day  disappear — that  the 
edifices  would  all  crumble  into  ruin,  and  the  decom- 
posed material  cover  up  and  conceal  the  massive 
towers  and  walls,  presenting  nothing  to  the  eye  but 
rounded  hillocks,  huge  unsightly  "heaps."  It  may  be 
that  such  a  fate  had  already  befallen  the  great  cities  of 
Assyria,  which  had  been  destroyed  nearly  a  century 
earlier,  and  which,  from  the  nature  of  their  materials, 
must  have  gone  rapidly  to  decay.  But  the  lessons 
of  the  past  do  not  readily  impress  themselves  on  men ; 
and  it  must  have  required  a  deep  conviction  of  God's 
absolute  foreknowledge  on  the  part  of  the  Hebrew 
prophets  to  publish  it  abroad,  on  the  strength  of  a 
spiritual  communication,  that  such  a  fate  would  over- 

1  Layard,  " Nineveh  and  Babylon,"  p.  484;  Rich,  "First  Memoir," 
P-  25. 

2  Herod.,  i.  180. 


56  BAB  YL  ON  AND  E  G  YPT. 


take  the  greatest  city  of  their  day — "  the  glory  of 
kingdoms,  the  beauty  of  the  Chaldees'  excellency" 
(Isa.  xiii.  19) — the  city  "given  to  pleasure,  that  dwelt 
carelessly,  that  said  in  her  heart,  I  am,  and  none  else 
beside  me ;  I  shall  not  sit  as  a  widow,  neither  shall  I 
know  the  loss  of  children  "  (ch.  xlvii.  8). 

The  second  point  specially  to  be  noted  in  the 
prophecies  concerning  Babylon  is  the  prediction  of 
absolute  loss  of  inhabitants.  The  positions  of  import- 
ant cities  are  usually  so  well  chosen,  so  rich  in  natural 
advantages,  that  population  clings  to  them ;  dwindle 
and  decay  as  they  may,  decline  as  they  may  from  their  ' 
high  estate,  some  town,  some  village,  some  collection 
of  human  dwellings  still  occupies  a  portion  of  the 
original  site ;  their  ruins  echo  to  the  sound  of  the 
human  voice;  they  are  not  absolute  solitudes. 
Clusters  of  Arab  huts  cling  about  the  pillars  of  the 
great  temples  at  Luxor  and  Karnak ;  the  village  of 
Nebbi  Yunus  crowns  the  hill  formed  by  the  ruins  of 
Sennacherib's  palace  at  Nineveh ;  Memphis  hears  the 
hum  of  the  great  city  of  Cairo ;  Tanis,  the  capital  of 
Rameses  II.  and  his  successor,  the  Pharaoh  of  the 
Exodus,  lives  on  in  the  mud  hovels  of  San ;  Damas- 
cus, Athens,  Rome,  Antioch,  Byzantium,  Alexandria, 
have  remained  continuously  from  the  time  of  their 
foundation  towns  of  consequence.  But  Babylon  soon 
became,  and  has  for  ages  been,  an  absolute  desert= 
Strabo,  writing  in  the  reign  of  Augustus,  could  say 
of  it  that  "  the  great  city  had  become  a  great  solitude."  ^ 

^Strab.,  xvi.  I,  ^  5  : — 'H  neydlr]  TrdTiiq  jueydTirj  'crtv  Iprjuia 


NOTICES  IN  ISAIAH  AND  JEREMIAH.  157 

Jerome  tells  us  that  the  Persian  kings  had  made  it 
into  one  of  their  **  paradises,"  or  hunting  parks/ 
Seleucia,  Ctesiphon,  Bagdad,  successively  took  its 
place,  and  were  built  out  of  its  ruins.  There  was  "  no 
healing  of  its  bruise."  When  European  travellers 
began  to  make  their  way  to  the  far  East,  the  report 
which  they  brought  home  was  as  follows  : — "  Babylon 
is  in  the  grete  desertes  of  Arabye,  upon  the  way  as 
men  gone  towards  the  kyngdome  of  Caldee.  But  it 
is  fulle  longe  sithe  ony  man  neyhe  to  the  towne ;  for 
it  is  alle  dcscrte,  and  fulle  of  dragons  and  grete 
serpentes."  ^  The  accounts  of  modern  explorers  are 
similar.  They  tell  us  that  ''the  site  of  Babylon  is  a 
naked  and  a  hideous  waste."  ^  "All  around,"  says  one 
of  the  latest,  "  is  a  blank  waste,  recalling  the  words 
of  Jeremiah — '  Her  cities  are  a  desolation,  a  dry  land, 
and  a  wilderness,  a  land  wherein  no  man  dwelleth, 
neither  doth  any  son  of  man  pass  thereby.'"'^  No 
village  crowns  any  of  the  great  mounds  which  mark 
the  situations  of  the  principal  buildings;  no  huts 
nestle  among  the  lower  eminences.  A  single  modern 
building  shows  itself  on  the  summit  of  the  largest 
tumulus ;  it  is  a  tomb,  empty  and  silent. 

Isaiah  intensifies  his  description  of  the  solitude  by 
the  statement,  "  Neither  shall  the  Arabian  pitch  tent 
there,  neither  shall  the  shepherds  make  their  fold 
there"  (ch.  xiii.  20).     If  the  entire  space  contained 

1 "  Comment,  in  Esaiam,''  vol.  v.,  p.  25,  C. 

2  Maundeville's  Travels  (1322),  quoted  by  Ker  Porter,  vol.ii.,  p.  336. 

^Layard,  1.  s.  c.  *Loftus,  "Chaldasa  and  Susiana,"  p.  20. 


158  BABYLON  AND  EGYPT. 

within  the  circuit  of  the  ancient  walls  be  viewed  as 
"  Babylon,"  the  words  of  the  prophet  will  not  be  liter- 
ally true.  The  black  tents  of  the  Zobeide  Arabs  are 
often  seen  dotting  the  plain — green  in  spring,  yellow 
in  autumn — which  encircles  the  great  mounds,  stretch- 
ing from  their  base  to  the  far  horizon.  Much  of  this 
space  was  no  doubt  included  within  the  walls  of  the 
ancient  city ;  and  this  is  traversed  by  the  Arabian  from 
time  to  time — flocks  are  pastured  there,  and  tents 
pitched  there.  But  if  the  term  "  Babylon  "  be  restricted 
to  the  mass  of  ruins  to  which  the  name  still  attaches, 
and  which  must  have  constituted  the  heart  of  the 
ancient  town,  then  Isaiah's  words  will  be  strictly  true 
in  their  most  literal  sense.  On  the  actual  ruins  of 
Babylon  the  Arabian  neither  pitches  his  tent  nor 
pastures  his  flocks — in  the  first  place,  because  the 
nitrous  soil  produces  no  pasture  to  tempt  him ;  and 
secondly,  because  an  evil  reputation  attaches  to  the 
entire  site,  which  is  thought  to  be  the  haunt  of  evil 
spirits.^ 

A  curious  feature  in  the  prophecies,  and  one  worthy 
of  notice,  is  the  apparent  contradiction  that  exists 
between  two  sets  of  statements  contained  in  them,  one 
of  which  attributes  the  desolation  of  Babylon  to  the 
action  of  water,  while  the  other  represents  the  waters 
as  "dried  up,"  and  the  site  as  cursed  with  drought  and 

^"AIl  the  people  of  the  country,"  says  Mr.  Rich,  "assert  that  it  is 
extremely  dangerous  to  approach  this  mound  (the  Kasr)  after  nightfall, 
on  account  of  the  multitude  of  evil  spirits  by  which  it  is  haunted" 
("First  Memoir,"  p.  27).  Compare  Ker  Porter's  "Travels,"  vol.  ii., 
P-37I- 


NOTICES  IN  ISAIAH  AND  JEREMIAH.  159 

barrenness.  To  the  former  class  belong  the  statements 
of  Isaiah,  "  I  will  also  make  it  a  possession  for  the 
bittern,  and  pools  of  water''  (ch.  xiv.  23);  and  "The 
cormorant  (pelican  ?)  and  the  bittern  shall  possess  it"  (ch. 
xxxiv.  11);  together  with  the  following  passage  of 
Jeremiah,  "  The  sea  is  come  up  upon  Babylon ;  she  is 
covered  with  the  imdtitude  of  the  waves  thereof  (ch.  li. 
42) ;  to  the  latter  such  declarations  as  the  subjoined, 
"  A  drought  is  upon  her  waters,  and  they  shall  be  dried 
up''  (Jer.  1.  38);  "  I  will  dry  up  her  sea"  (ch.  li.  36); 
"  Her  cities  are  a  desolation,  a  dry  land,  and  a  wilder- 
ness "  (ver.  43) ;  "  the  hindermost  of  the  nations  shall 
be  a  wilderness,  a  dry  land,  and  a  desert"  (ch.  1.  12); 
**  Come  down  and  sit  in  the  dust,  O  virgin  daughter  of 
Babylon"  (Isa.  xlvii.  i). 

But  this  antithesis,  this  paradox,  is  exactly  in 
accordance  with  the  condition  of  things  which  trav- 
ellers note  as  to  this  day  attaching  to  the  site.  The 
dry,  arid  aspect  of  the  ruins,  of  the  vast  mounds  which 
cover  the  greater  buildings,  and  even  the  lesser 
elevations  which  spread  far  into  the  plain  at  their  base, 
receives  continual  notice.  "  The  whole  surface  of  the 
mounds  appears  to  the  eye,"  says  Ker  Porter,  "nothing 
but  vast  irregular  hills  of  earth,  mixed  with  fragments 
of  brick,  pottery,  vitrifications,  mortar,  bitumen,  etc., 
while  the  foot  at  every  step  sinks  into  the  loose  dust 
and  rubbish."'^  And  again  ''Every  spot  of  ground  in 
sight  zvas  totally  barren,  and  on  several  tracts  appeared 
the  common  marks  of  former  building.     It  is  an  old 

^  Ker  Porter,  "Travels,"  vol,  ii.,  p.  372. 


1 60  BAB YL ON  AND  EGYPT. 

adage  that  '  where  a  curse  has  fallen  grass  will  never 
grow.*  In  like  manner  the  decomposing  materials  of  a 
Babylonian  structure  doom  the  earth  on  wJiich  they  perish 
to  an  everlasting  sterility T  ^  "  On  all  sides,"  says  Sir 
Austen  Layard,  "  fragments  of  glass,  marble,  pottery, 
and  inscribed  brick  are  mingled  with  that  peculiar 
nitrous  and  blanched  soil  which,  bred  from  the  remains 
of  ancient  habitations,  checks  or  destroys  vegetation, 
and  renders  the  site  of  Babylon  a  naked  and  hideous 
waster'^ 

On  the  other  hand,  the  neglect  of  the  embankments 
and  canals  which  anciently  controlled  the  waters  of 
the  Euphrates,  and  made  them  a  defence  to  the  city 
and  not  a  danger,  has  consigned  great  part  of  what 
was  anciently  Babylon  to  the  continual  invasion  of 
floods,  which,  stagnating  in  the  lower  grounds,  have 
converted  large  tracts  once  included  within  the  walls 
of  the  city  into  lakes,  pools,  and  marshes.  "The 
country  to  the  westward  of  Babylon,"  writes  Ker 
Porter,  "  seemed  very  low  and  swampy.  .  .  .  On 
turning  to  the  north,  similar  morasses  and  ponds 
tracked  the  land  in  various  parts.  Indeed,  for  a  long 
time  after  the  annual  overflowing  of  the  Euphrates,  not 
only  great  part  of  the  plain  is  little  better  than  a  swamp, 
but  large  deposits  of  the  waters  are  left  stagnant  in 
the  hollows  between  the  ruins."  ^  "  From  the  summit 
of  the  Birs  Nimroud,"  observes  Layard,  "I  gazed  over 

^  Ker  Porter,  "Travels,"  vol.  ii.,  p,  391. 

2  Layard,  '<  Nineveh  and  Babylon,"  p.  484. 

3  Ker  Porter,  "  Travels,"  vol.  ii.,  p.  389. 


NO  TICES  IN  ISAIAH  AND  JEREMIAH.  i6i 

a  vast  marsh,  for  Babylon  is  made  'a  possession  for 
the  bittern,  and  pools  of  water.' "  ^  Of  the  space  imme- 
diately about  the  chief  ruins,  Ker  Porter  notes,  *'  This 
spot  contains  some  cultivation,  but  more  water,  which 
sapping  element  may  well  account  for  the  abrupt 
disappearance  of  the  two  parallel  ridges  at  its  most 
swampy  point."  ^ 

Even  some  of  the  minor  features  of  the  picture, 
which  one  might  naturally  have  regarded  as  the  mere 
artistic  filling  up  of  the  scene  of  desolation,  which  he 
had  to  depict,  by  the  imagination  of  the  prophet,  are 
found  to  be  in  strict  and  literal  accordance  with  the 
actual  fact.  **  The  daughters  of  the  owl  shall  dwell 
there,"  says  Isaiah  (ch.  xiii.  21),  and  Jeremiah,  *' The 
owls  shall  dwell  therein  "  (ch.  1.  39).  "  In  most  of  the 
cavities  of  the  Babil  mound,"  remarks  Mr.  Rich,  "there 
are  numbers  of  bats  and  owlsT  ^  Sir  Austen  Layard 
goes  further  into  particulars.  "  A  large  grey  owl,"  he 
tells  us,  "  is  found  in  great  numbers — frequently  in 
flocks  of  nearly  a  hundred — in  the  low  shrubs  among 
the  ruins  of  Babylon."  ^  The  "  owl  "  of  the  prophets 
is  thus  not  a  mere  flourish  of  rhetoric,  but  a  historical 
reality — an  actual  feature  of  the  scene,  as  it  presents 
itself  to  the  traveller  at  the  present  day. 

"Wild  beasts  of  the  desert  shall  lie  there"  (Isa.  xiii. 
21);    "the  wild   beasts  of  the  desert,  with  the  wild 

* "  Nineveh  and  Babylon,"  p.  300. 
2  Ker  Porter,  "Travels,"  vol.  ii.,  p.  351. 
'  Rich,  "First  Memoir,"  p.  30. 
*  Layard,  "  Nineveh  and  Babylon,"  p.  484,  note. 
II 


i62  BAB  YL ON  AND  EG  YPT. 

beasts  of  the  islands,  shall  dwell  there  "  (Jer.  1.  39). 
So  it  was  prophesied,  and  so  it  is.  Speaking  of  the 
Babil  mound,  Mr.  Rich  observes,  "  There  are  many 
dens  of  wild  beasts  in  various  parts,  in  one  of  which 
I  found  the  bones  of  sheep  and  other  animals,  and 
perceived  a  strong  smell,  like  that  of  a  lion."^  "There 
are  several  deep  excavations  into  the  sides  of  the 
mound,"  remarks  Ker  Porter.  "  These  souterrains 
are  now  the  refuge  of  jackals  and  other  savage  animals. 
The  mouths  of  their  entrances  are  strewn  with  the 
bones  of  sheep  and  goats ;  and  the  loathsome  smell 
that  issues  from  most  of  them  is  sufficient  warning 
not  to  proceed  into  the  den."  ^  On  a  visit  to  the  Birs 
Nimroud,  the  same  traveller  observed  through  his 
glass  several  lions  on  the  summit  of  the  great  mound, 
and  afterwards  found  their  foot-prints  in  the  soft  soil 
of  the  desert  at  its  base.^  This  feature  of  the  prophe- 
cies also  is  therefore  literally  fulfilled.  The  solitude, 
deserted  by  men,  is  sought  the  more  on  that  account 
by  the  wild  beasts  of  the  country ;  and  the  lion,  the 
jackal,  and  probably  the  leopard,  have  their  lairs  in 
the  substructions  of  the  temple  of  Belus,  and  the 
palace  of  Nebuchadnezzar. 

No  doubt  there  are  also  features  of  the  prophetic 
announcements  which  have  not  at  present  been 
authenticated.  It  is  impossible  to  say  what  exactly 
was  intended  by  the  "  doleful  creatures "  and  the 
"satyrs"   of   Isaiah,  which  were  to  haunt  the  ruins, 

*  Rich,  "  First  Memoir,"  pp.  29,  30. 

'  Ker  Porter,  "  Travels,"  vol,  ii.,  p,  342.  '  Ibid.,  pp.  387-8. 


NO  TICES  IN  ISA  I  AH  A  ND  JEREMIAH.  1 63 

and  to  have  their  habitation  among  them.  Literally, 
the  "satyrs  "  are  "hairy  ones,"^ — a  descriptive  epithet, 
which  is  applicable  to  beasts  of  the  field  generally. 
The  "  dragons  "  of  Isaiah  (ch.  xiii.  22)  and  Jeremiah 
(ch.  li.  37)  should  be  serpents,  which  have  not  been 
noted  recently  as  lurking  among  the  "  heaps."  Sir  J. 
Maundeville,^  however,  tells  us  that  in  his  day — the 
early  part  of  the  fourteenth  century — the  site  of  Baby- 
lon was  "  fulle  of  dragons  and  grete  serpentes,"  as 
well  as  of  "  dyverse  other  veneymouse  bestes  alle 
abouten."  It  is  possible  that  the  breed  of  serpents 
has  died  out  in  Lower  Mesopotamia ;  it  is  equally 
possible  that  it  exists,  but  has  been  hitherto  overlooked 
by  travellers.^ 

On  the  whole,  it  is  submitted  to  the  reader's  judg- 
ment whether  the  prophetic  announcements  of  Holy 
Scripture,  as  to  what  was  to  befall  Babylon,  are  not 
almost  as  important  evidence  of  the  truth  of  the 
Scripture  record  as  the  historical  descriptions.  The 
historical  descriptions  have  to  be  compared  with  the 
statements  of  profane  writers,  which  may  or  may  not 
be  true  statements.  The  prophetical  declarations  can 
be  placed  side  by  side  with  actual  tangible  facts — facts 
which  it  is  impossible  to  gainsay,  facts  whereto  each 
fresh  observer  who  penetrates  into  Lower  Mesopo- 
tamia is  an  additional  witness.     Travellers  to  the  site 

1  D"U:^K?  from  '^"'^^,  "hairy,  rough." 

2  Quoted  by  Ker  Porter  ("Travels,"  vol.  ii.,  p.  336). 

^  If  the  true  interpretation  of  the  word  used  be  (as  some  think) 
"jackals,"  the  statement  made  would  be  one  of  those  fulfilled  most 
clearly. 


i64  BAB  YL  ON  AND  EGYPT. 

of  Babylon,  even  when  in  no  respect  religious  men, 
are,  if  they  have  the  most  moderate  acquaintance  with 
Scripture,  penetrated  with  a  deep  feeling  of  astonish- 
ment at  the  exactness  of  the  agreement  between  the 
announcements  made  two  thousand  five  hundred  years 
ago  and  the  actual  state  of  things  which  they  see  with 
their  eyes.  The  fate  denounced  against  Babylon  has 
been  accomplished,  not  only  in  all  essential  points,  but 
even  in  various  minute  particulars.  The  facts  cannot 
be  disputed — there  they  are.  While  historical  evidence 
loses  force  the  further  we  are  removed  from  the  events 
recorded,  the  evidence  of  fulfilled  prophecy  continually 
gains  in  strength  as  the  ages  roll  on  in  their  unceasing 
course ;  and  the  modern  searcher  after  truth  possesses 
proofs  of  the  trustworthiness  of  the  Word  of  God 
which  were  denied  to  those  who  lived  at  an  earlier 
period. 


CHAPTER   XIII. 

NOTICES    OF    EGYPT    IN    GENESIS. 

"  The  sons  of  Ham :  Cush,  and  Mizraim,  and  Phut,  and  Canaan  " 
(Gen.  X.  6).  "  And  Mizraim  begat  Ludim,  and  Ananim,  and  Lehabim, 
and  Naphtuhim,  and  Pathrusim,  and  Casluhim  (out  of  whom  came 
Philistim),  and  Caphtorim." — Vers.  13,  14. 

These  are  the  first  notices  of  Egypt  which  occur  in 
Holy  Scripture.  The  word  Mizraim,  which  is  here 
simply  transliterated  from  the  Hebrew  (an^fp),  is  else- 
where, except  in  i  Chron.  i.  8,  uniformly  translated  by 
"  Egypt,"  or  "  the  Egyptians."  It  undoubtedly  desig- 
nates the  country  still  known  to  us  as  Egypt ;  but  the 
origin  of  the  name  is  obscure.  There  is  no  term 
corresponding  to  it  in  the  hieroglyphical  inscriptions, 
where  Egypt  is  called  "Kam,"  or  "Khem,"  "the  Black 
(land),"  or  "  Ta  Mera,"  "the  inundation  country." 
The  Assyrians,  however,  are  found  to  have  denomi- 
nated the  region  "  Muzur,"  or  "  Musr,"  and  the  Persians 
"  Mudr,"  or  "  Mudraya,"  a  manifest  corruption.  The 
present  Arabic  name  is  "  Misr " ;  and  it  is  quite 
possible  that  these  various  forms  represent  some 
ancient  Egyptian  word,  which  was  in  use  among  the 
people,  though  not  found  in  the  hieroglyphics.     The 

165 


1 66  BAB YL ON  A ND  EGYPT. 

Hebrew  "  Mizraim  "  is  a  dual  word,  and  signifies  "the 
two  Mizrs,"  or  "  the  two  Egypts,"  an  expression  readily 
intelligible  from  the  physical  conformation  of  the 
country,  which  naturally  divides  itself  into  "Upper" 
and  "  Lower  Egypt,"  the  long  narrow  valley  of  the 
Nile,  and  the  broad  tract,  known  as  the  Delta,  on  the 
Mediterranean. 

We  learn  from  the  former  of  the  two  passages 
quoted  above  that  the  Egyptian  people  was  closely 
allied  to  three  others,  viz.,  the  Cushite  or  Ethiopian 
race,  the  people  known  to  the  Hebrews  as  "  Phut," 
and  the  primitive  inhabitants  of  Canaan.  The  ethnic 
connection  of  ancient  races  is  a  matter  rarely  touched 
on  by  profane  writers ;  but  the  connection  of  the 
Egyptians  with  the  Canaanites  was  asserted  by  Eupo- 
lemus,^  and  a  large  body  of  classical  tradition  tends  to 
unite  them  with  the  Ethiopians.  The  readiness  with 
which  Ethiopia  received  Egyptian  civilization^  lends 
support  to  the  theory  of  a  primitive  identity  of  race ; 
and  linguistic  research,  so  far  as  it  has  been  pursued 
hitherto,  is  in  harmony  with  the  supposed  close 
connection. 

From  the  other  passage  (Gen.  x.  13,  14)  we  learn 
that  the  Egyptians  themselves  were  ethnically  separ- 
ated into  a  number  of  distinct  tribes,  or  subordinate 
races,  of  whom  the  writer  enumerates  no  fewer  than 
seven.     The  names  point  to  a  geographic  separation 

^  See  a  fragment  of  Eupolemus  quoted  by  Polyhistor  in  C.  Muller's 
"Fr.  Hist.  Groec,"  vol.  iii.,  p.  212,  Fr.  3. 
2  Herod,  ii.  30. 


NOTICES  IN  GENESIS.  167 

of  the  races,  since  they  have  their  representatives  in 
different  portions  of  the  Egyptian  territory.  Now  this 
separation  accords  with,  and  explains,  the  strongly 
marked  division  of  Egypt  into  "  nomes,"  having  con- 
flicting usages  and  competing  religious  systems.  It 
suggests  the  idea  that  the  "  nome  "  was  the  original 
territory  of  a  tribe,  and  that  the  Egyptian  monarchy 
grew  up  by  an  aggregation  of  nomes,  which  were  not 
originally  divisions  of  a  kingdom,  like  coundes,  but 
distinct  states,  like  the  kingdoms  of  the  Heptarchy. 
This  is  a  view  taken  by  many  of  the  historians  of 
ancient  Egypt,  derived  from  the  facts  as  they  existed  in 
later  times.  It  receives  confirmation  and  explanation 
from  the  enumeration  of  Egyptian  races — not  a  com- 
plete  one,  probably— \v  hi ch  is  made  in  this  passage. 

"  Abram  went  down  into  Egypt,  to  sojourn  there  .  .  .  And  it  came 
to  pass  that,  when  Abram  was  come  into  Egypt,  the  Egyptians  beheld- 
the  woman  (Sarai)  that  she  was  \cxy  fair.  The  princes  also  of  Pharaoh 
saw  her  and  commended  her  before  Pharaoh;  and  the  woman  was 
taken  into  Pharaoh's  house.  And  he  entreated  Abram  well  for  her 
sake  :  and  he  had  sheep,  and  oxen,  and  he-asses,  and  men-servants,  and 
maid-servants,  and  she-asses,  and  camels.  And  the  Lord  plagued 
Pharaoh  and  his  house  with  great  plagues,  because  of  Sarai,  Abram's 
wife.  And  Pharaoh  called  Abram,  and  said.  What  is  this  that  thou 
hast  done  unto  me  ?  Why  didst  thou  not  tell  me  that  she  was  thy 
wife  ?  Why  saidst  thou.  She  is  my  sister  ?  So  I  might  have  taken  her 
to  me  to  wife :  now  therefore  behold  thy  wife,  take  her,  and  go  thy 
way.  And  Pharaoh  commanded  his  men  concerning  him :  and  they 
sent  him  away,  and  his  wife,  and  all  that  he  had."— Gen.  xii.  10-20. 

The  early  date  of  this  notice  makes  it   peculiarly 
interesting.     Whether  we  take  the  date  of  Abraham's 


1 68  BAB  YL  ON  AND  E G  YPT. 

visit  as  circ.  b.  c.  1920,  with  Usher,  or,  with  others,^  as 
a  hundred  and  sixty  years  earher,  it  seems  almost 
certain  that  it  must  have  fallen  into  the  time  of  that 
"  old  Egyptian  Empire  "  which  preceded  the  great 
Hyksos  invasion,  and  developed  at  that  remote  date 
the  original  Egyptian  civilization.  Does  then  the 
portraiture  of  the  Egypt  of  this  period  resemble  that 
of  the  ancient  empire,  as  revealed  to  us  by  the  monu- 
ments ?  No  doubt  the  portraiture  is  exceedingly 
slight,  the  main  object  of  the  writer,  apparently,  being 
to  record  an  incident  in  the  life  of  Abraham  wherein 
he  fell  into  sin.  Still  certain  points  are  sufficiently 
marked,  as  the  following: — i.  Egypt  is  a  settled 
monarchy  under  a  Pharaoh,  who  has  princes  {sarini) 
under  him,  at  a  time  when  the  neighbouring  countries 
are  occupied  mainly  by  nomadic  tribes  under  petty 
chiefs.  2.  Reports  are  brought  to  the  Pharaoh  by  his 
princes  with  respect  to  foreigners  who  enter  his 
country.  3.  Egypt  is  already  known  as  a  land  of 
plenty,  where  there  will  be  corn  and  forage  when 
famine  has  fallen  upon  Syria.  4.  Domesticated  ani- 
mals are  abundant  there,  and  include  sheep,  oxen, 
asses,  and  camels,  but  (apparently)  no  horses.  What 
has  profane  history  to  say  on  these  four  points  ? 

First,  then,  profane  history  lays  it  down  that  a 
settled  government  was  established  in  Egypt,  and 
monarchical  institutions  set  up,  at  an  earlier  date  than 
in  any  other  country.  On  this  point  Herodotus, 
Diodorus,  and  the  Greek  writers  generally,  are  agreed, 
»As  Mr.  Stuart  Poole  ("Diet,  of  the  Bible,"  vol.  i.,  p.  508). 


NOTICES  IN  GENESIS.  169 


while  the  existing  remains,  assisted  by  the  interpreta- 
tion of  Manetho,  point  to  the  same  result.  It  is  not 
now  questioned  by  any  historian  of  repute  but  that 
the  Eg>'ptian  monarchy  dates  from  a  time  anterior  to 
B.  c.  20CX),  while  there  are  writers  who  carry  it  back  to 
B.C.  5004.^  The  title  of  the  monarch,  from  a  very 
remote  antiquity,^  was  "  Per-ao,"  or  "  the  Great 
House,"  ^  which  the  Hebrews  would  naturally  repre- 
sent by  Phar-aoh  (ri;?n£!).  He  was,  from  the  earliest 
times  to  which  the  monuments  go  back,  supported  by 
powerful  nobles,  or  "  princes,"  who  were  hereditary 
landed  proprietors  of  great  wealth.* 

Secondly,  a  scene  in  a  tomb  at  Beni  Hassan  clearly 
shows  that,  under  the  Old  Empire,  foreigners  on  their 
arrival  in  the  country,  especially  if  they  came  with  a 
train  of  attendants,  as  Abraham  would  (Gen.  xiv.  14), 
were  received  at  the  frontier  by  the  governor  of  the 
province,  whose  secretary  took  down  in  writing  their 
number,  and  probably  their  description,  doubtless  for 
the  purpose  of  forwarding  a  "  report "  to  the  court. 
Reports  of  this  character,  belonging  to  later  times, 
have  been  found,  and  are  among  the  most  interesting 
of  the  ancient  documents.  It  was  regarded  as  espe- 
cially important  to  apprise  the  monarch  of  all  that 
happened  upon  his  north-eastern  frontier,  where  Egypt 

»  So  Lenormant,  following  Mariette  ("  Manuel  d'Histoire  Aneienne,'* 
vol.  i.,  p.  321). 

2 See  Canon  Cook  in  the  "Speaker's  Conimentary,"  vol.  i.,  p.  47S, 

3  Compare  the  phrase  "  the  Ottoman  Porte." 

*  Birch,  "  Egypt  from  the  Earliest  Times,"  pp.  44,  64,  etc. 


1 70  BAB  YL  ON  AND  E G  YPT. 

abutted  upon  tribes  of  some  considerable  strength, 
whose  proceedings  had  to  be  watched  with  care. 

Thirdly,  there  is  abundant  evidence  that,  under  the 
Old  Empire,  Egypt  was  largely  productive,  and  kept 
in  its  granaries  a  great  store  of  corn,  which  was 
available  either  for  home  consumption,  or  for  the 
relief  of  foreigners  on  occasions  of  scarcity.  In  the 
time  of  the  twelfth  dynasty  state-granaries  existed, 
which  were  under  the  control  of  overseers  appointed 
by  the  crown,  who  were  officials  of  a  high  dignity, 
and  had  many  scribes,  or  clerks,  employed  in  carrying 
out  the  details  of  their  business.^  Even  private  per- 
sons laid  up  large  quantities  of  grain,  and  were  able  in 
bad  seasons  to  prevent  any  severe  distress,  either  by 
gratuitous  distributions,  or  by  selling  their  accumula- 
tions at  a  moderate  price.^ 

Fourthly,  the  domesticated  animals  in  the  early 
times  include  all  those  mentioned  as  given  to  Abra- 
ham by  the  Pharaoh  with  whom  he  came  into  contact, 
except  the  camel,  while  they  do  not  include  the  horse. 
It  was  once  denied^  that  the  Egypt  of  Abraham's 
time  possessed  asses  ;  but  the  tombs  of  Ghizeh  have 
shown  that  they  were  the  ordinary  beast  of  burden 
during  the  pyramid  period,  and  that  sometimes  an 
individual  possessed  as  many  as  seven  or  eight  hun- 
dred. No  trace  has  been  found  of  camels  in  the 
Egyptian   monuments,   and  it  is  quite   possible  that 

^  Birch,  "  Egypt  from  the  Earliest  Times,"  p.  63. 

2  "  Records  of  the  Past,"  vol.  xii.,  pp.  63,  64. 

3  By  Von  Bohlcn  in  his  "  Die  Genesis  erlautert." 


NOTICES  IN  GENESIS.  171 


they  were  only  employed  upon  the  north-eastern 
frontier ;  but  the  traffic  between  Egypt  and  the  Sinaitic 
peninsula,  which  was  certainly  carried  on  by  the 
Pharaohs  of  the  fourth,  fifth,  sixth,  and  twelfth  dynas- 
ties, can  scarcely  have  been  conducted  in  any  other 
way.^  For  Abraham,  a  temporary  sojourner  in  the 
land,  about  to  return  through  the  desert  into  Palestine, 
camels  would  be  a  most  appropriate  present,  and  thus 
their  inclusion  in  the  list  of  animals  given  is  open  to  no 
reasonable  objection,  though  certainly  v/ithout  con- 
firmation from  the  remains  hitherto  discovered  in 
Egypt.  The  omission  from  the  list  of  the  horse  is,  on 
the  contrary,  a  most  significant  fact,  since  horses,  so 
abundant  in  Egypt  at  the  date  of  the  Exodus  (Exod. 
ix.  3  ;  xiv.  9,  23  ;  xv.  I,  21),  were  unknown  under  the 
early  monarchy,^  having  been  first  introduced  by  the 
Hyksos,  and  first  largely  used  by  the  kings  of  the 
eighteenth  dynasty. 

"  They  lifted  up  their  eyes,  and  looked,  and,  behold,  a  company  of 
Ishmaelites  came  from  Gilead,  with  their  camels,  bearing  spicer}',  and 
balm,  and  myrrh,  going  to  carry  it  down  to  Eg>'pt  .  .  .  and  they  sold 
Joseph  to  the  Ishmaelites  for  twenty  pieces  of  silver :  and  they  brought 
Joseph  into  Egypt  .  .  .  and  sold  him  into  Egypt  unto  Potiphar,  an 
officer  of  Pharaoh's,  and  captain  of  the  guard." — Gen,  xxxvii.  25-36. 

The  first  thing  here  especially  noticeable  is  that 
Egypt  requires  for  its  consumption  large  quantities  of 
spices,  and  is  supplied  with  them,  not  by  direct  com- 

*  Compare  Gen.  xxxvii.  25. 

2  Birch,  pp.  42,  82  ;  Chabas,  "  Etudes  sur  1' Antiquite  Historique,"  p. 
421. 


172  BABYLON  AND  EGYPT. 


merce  with  Arabia  across  the  Red  Sea,  as  we  might 
have  expected,  but  by  caravans  of  merchants,  who 
reach  Egypt  through  Gilead  and  Southern  Palestine. 
Now  the  large  consumption  of  spices  by  the  Egyptians 
is  witnessed  by  Herodotus,  who  tells  us  that,  in  the 
best  method  of  embalming,  which  was  employed  by 
all  the  wealthier  classes  of  the  Egyptians,  a  large 
quantity  of  aromatics,  especially  myrrh  and  cassia,  was 
necessary,  the  abdomen  being  not  only  washed  out 
with  an  infusion  of  them,  but  afterwards  filled  up  with 
the  bruised  spices  themselves/  The  Egyptian  monu- 
ments show  that  aromatics  were  also  required  for  the 
worship  of  the  gods,  especially  Ammon.  Not  only 
do  we  continually  see  the  priests  with  censers  in  their 
hands,  in  which  incense  is  being  burnt,  but  we  read  of 
an  expedition  made  to  the  land  of  Punt  for  the  express 
purpose  of  bringing  frankincense  and  frankincense 
trees  "  for  the  majesty  of  the  god  Ammon,"  to 
"  honour  him  with  resin  from  the  incense-trees,  and 
by  vases  full  of  fresh  incense."^  It  is  observable, 
however,  on  this  particular  occasion,  the  spicery 
imported  came  from  Arabia,  and  reached  Egypt  by 
sea,  which  may  seem  at  first  sight  to  be  an  objection 
to  the  existence  of  a  caravan  spice  trade.  But  a  con- 
sideration of  the  dates  deprives  this  objection  of  all 
force.  The  expedition  to  Punt,  which  is  spoken  of  as 
the  first  that  ever  took  place,  was  sent  by  Queen 
Hatasu,  and  belongs  to  the  eighteenth  dynasty— the 
first  of  the  New  Empire.  Joseph  was  sold  into  Egypt 
^  Herod,  ii.  86.  2  «  Records  of  the  Past,"  vol  x.,  pp.  18, 19. 


NOTICES  IN  GENESIS.  173 

under  the  Middle  Empire,  and,  according  to  tradition,^ 
was  prime  minister  of  Apepi,  the  "  shepherd  "  king. 
The  sea-trade  with  Punt  for  spices  not  being  at  that 
time  open,  the  spices  of  Arabia  could  only  be  obtained 
by  land  traffic. 

The  passage  further  implies  the  existence  in  Egypt 
at  this  time  of  a  traffic  in  slaves,  who  were  foreigners, 
and  valued  at  no  very  high  rate.  The  monuments 
prove  slaves  to  have  been  exceedingly  numerous 
under  the  Ancient  Empire.  The  king  had  a  vast 
number ;  the  estates  of  the  nobles  were  cultivated  by 
them ;  and  a  large  body  of  hicroduli,  or  "  sacred 
slaves,"  was  attached  to  most  of  the  temples.  Foreign 
slaves  seem  to  have  been  preferred  to  native  ones,  and 
wars  were  sometimes  undertaken  less  with  the  object 
of  conquest  or  subjugation  than  with  that  of  obtaining 
a  profit  by  selling  those  who  were  taken  prisoners  in 
the  slave  market.^  We  have  no  direct  information  as 
to  the  value  of  slaves  at  this  period  from  Egyptian 
sources,  but  from  their  abundance  they  were  likely  to 
be  low-priced,  and  "  twenty  shekels  "  is  very  much  the 
rate  at  which,  judging  from  analogy,  we  should  have 
been  inclined  to  estimate  them. 

"  The  Lord  was  with  Joseph,  and  he  was  a  prosperous  man ;  and  he 
was  in  the  house  of  his  master,  the  Egyptian.  And  his  master  saw 
that  the  Lord  was  with  him,  and  that  the  Lord  made  all  that  he  did  to 
prosper  in  his  hand.  And  Joseph  found  grace  in  his  sight,  and  he 
served  him ;  and  he  made  him  overseer  over  his  house,  and  all  that  he 

1  Syncellus,  "  Chronograph,"  p.  62,  B. 

2  Brugsch,  "  Hist,  of  Egypt,"  vol.  1.,  p.  i6l. 


174 


BAB  YL ON  AND  EG  YPT. 


had  he  put  into  his  hand.  And  it  came  to  pass  from  the  time  that  he  had 
made  him  overseer  in  his  house,  and  over  all  that  he  had,  that  the  Lord 
blessed  the  Egyptian's  house  for  Joseph's  sake ;  and  the  blessing  of  the 
Lord  was  upon  all  that  he  had  in  the  house,  and  in  the  field.  And  he 
left  all  that  he  had  in  Joseph's  hand,  and  he  knew  not  aught  he  had, 
save  the  bread  which  he  did  eat.  And  Joseph  was  a  goodly  person 
and  well-favoured.  And  it  came  to  pass  after  these  thnigs  that  his 
master's  wife  cast  her  eyes  upon  Joseph ;  and  she  said,  Lie  with  me. 
But  he  refused,  and  said  unto  his  master's  wife.  Behold,  my  master 
wotteth  not  what  is  with  me  in  the  house,  and  he  hath  committed  all 
that  he  hath  to  my  hand ;  there  is  none  greater  in  this  house  than  I ; 
neither  hath  he  kept  back  anything  from  me  but  thee,.because  thou  art 
his  wife ;  how  then  can  I  do  this  great  wickedness,  and  sin  against 
God  ?  And  it  came  to  pass,  as  she  spake  to  Joseph  day  by  day,  that  he 
hearkened  not  to  her,  to  lie  by  her,  or  to  be  with  her.  And  it  came  to 
pass  about  this  time  that  Joseph  went  into  the  house  to  do  his  business, 
and  there  was  none  of  the  men  of  the  house  there  within.  And  she 
caught  him  by  his  garment,  saying.  Lie  with  me ;  and  he  left  his  gar- 
ment in  her  hand,  and  fled,  and  got  him  out.  And  it  came  to  pass 
when  she  saw  that  he  had  left  his  garment  in  her  hand,  and  was 
fled  forth,  that  she  called  unto  the  men  of  her  house,  and  spake  unto 
them  saying,  See  he  hath  brought  in  an  Hebrew  unto  us  to  mock  us ;  he 
came  in  unto  me  to  lie  with  me,  and  I  cried  with  a  loud  voice ;  and  it 
came  to  pass,  when  he  heard  that  I  lifted  up  my  voice  and  ci-icd,  that 
he  left  his  garment  with  me,  and  fled,  and  got  him  out.  And  she  laid 
up  his  garment  by  her  until  his  lord  came  home.  And  she  spoke  unto 
him  according  to  these  words,  saying,  The  Hebrew  servant  which  thou 
hast  brought  unto  us  came  in  unto  me  to  mock  me ;  and  it  came  to 
pass,  as  I  lifted  up  my  voice  and  cried,  that  he  left  his  garment  with  me 
and  fled  out.  And  it  came  to  pass,  when  his  master  heard  "the  words 
of  his  wife,  which  she  spake  unto  him,  saying.  After  this  manner  did 
thy  servant  to  me,  that  his  wrath  was  kindled.  And  Joseph's  master 
took  him  and  put  him  into  the  prison." — Gen.  xxxix.  2-20. 

It  has  often  been  observed  that  this  picture  is  in 
remarkable  harmony  with  the  general  tone  of  Egyptian 


NOTICES  IN  GENESIS.  175 

manners  and  customs.  The  licentiousness  of  the 
women  provoked  the  strictures  of  the  Greek  historians, 
Herodotus  and  Diodorus/  The  Hberty  which  they 
enjoyed  of  intermixing  and  conversing  with  men,  so 
contrary  to  the  general  Oriental  practice,  is  fully  borne 
out,  both  by  the  tales  of  the  Egyptian  novelists,  and 
by  the  scenes  represented  upon  the  monuments.  The 
life  of  an  Egyptian  noble,  at  once  a  royal  official  and 
a  landed  proprietor,  with  much  to  manage  "  in  the 
field  "  (ver.  5)  as  well  as  in  his  house,  is  graphically 
sketched.  The  one  garment  of  the  slave  is  casually 
indicated  by  the  expression,  so  often  repeated,  "  he 
left  Jiis  garment  in  her  hand."  The  extraordinary 
dependence  placed  upon  "  overseers,"  or  stewards, 
who  had  the  entire  management  of  the  household,  the 
accounts,  and  the  farm  or  estate — a  very  peculiar 
feature  of  Egyptian  life — is  set  forth  with  great  force. 
But,  besides  these  isolated  points,  the  whole  narrative 
receives  most  curious  illustration  from  one  of  the  tales 
most  popular  among  the  Egyptians,  which  has  fortu- 
nately descended  to  our  day.  In  the  story  of  "  The 
Two  Brothers,"  written  by  the  illustrious  scribe  Anna, 
or  Enna,  for  the  delectation  of  Seti  II.,  when  heir- 
apparent  to  the  throne,  we  have  a  narrative  which 
contains  a  passage  so  nearly  parallel  to  this  portion  of 
Joseph's  history,  that  it  seems  worth  v/hile  quoting  it 
in  extenso. 

"  There  were  two  brothers,"  says  the  writer,  "  children 
of  one  mother  and  of  one  father — the  name  of  the 

^  Herod,  ii.  1 1 1 ;  Diod.  Sic.  i.  59. 


176  BAB  YL ON  AND  EG  YPT. 

elder  was  Anepu,  the  name  of  the  younger  Bata. 
Anepu  had  a  house  and  a  wife;  and  his  younger 
brother  was  like  a  son  to  him.  He  it  was  who  pro- 
vided Anepu  with  clothes,  he  it  was  who  attended 
upon  his  cattle,  he  who  managed  the  ploughing,  he 
who  did  all  the  labours  of  the  fields ;  indeed,  his 
younger  brother  was  so  good  a  labourer,  that  there 
was  not  his  equal  in  the  whole  land. 

"  And  when  the  days  had  multiplied  after  this,  it 
was  the  wont  of  the  younger  brother  to  be  with  the 
cattle  day  by  day,  and  to  take  them  home  to  the 
house  every  evening ;  he  came  laden  with  all  the  herbs 
of  the  field.  The  elder  brother  sat  with  his  wife,  and 
ate  and  drank,  while  the  younger  was  in  the  stable 
with  the  cattle.  The  younger,  when  the  day  dawned, 
rose  before  his  elder  brother,  took  bread  to  the  field, 
and  called  the  labourers  together  to  eat  bread  in  the 
field.  Then  he  followed  after  his  cattle,  and  they  told 
him  where  all  the  best  grasses  grew,  for  he  understood 
all  that  they  said ;  and  he  took  them  to  the  place 
where  was  the  goodly  herbage  which  they  desired. 
And  the  cattle  which  he  followed  after  became  exceed- 
ingly beautiful.     And  they  multiplied  exceedingly. 

"  Now  when  the  time  for  ploughing  came  his  elder 
brother  said  to  him,  *  Let  us  take  our  teams  for 
ploughing,  because  the  land  has  now  made  its  appear- 
ance \i.  e.,  the  inundation  has  subsided],  and  the  time 
is  excellent  for  ploughing  it.  Come  thou  then  with 
the  seed,  and  we  shall  accomplish  the  ploughing.' 
Thus  he  spake.     And  the  younger  brother  proceeded 


NOTICES  IN  GENESIS.  177 

to  do  all  that  his  elder  brother  told  him ;  and  when 
the  day  dawned  they  went  to  the  field  with  their 
[teams  ?],  and  worked  at  their  tillage,  and  enjoyed 
themselves  exceedingly  at  their  work. 

"  But  when  the  days  were  multiplied  after  this,  they 
were  in  the  field  together,  and  the  elder  brother  sent 
the  younger,  saying,  '  Go  and  fetch  seed  for  us  from 
the  village.'  And  the  younger  brother  found  the  wife 
of  the  elder  one  sitting  at  her  toilet ;  and  he  said  to 
her,  *  Arise,  and  give  me  seed,  that  I  may  go  back 
with  it  to  the  field,  because  my  elder  brother  wishes 
me  to  return  without  any  delay.'  And  she  said  to 
him,  *  Go,  open  the  bin,  and  take,  thyself,  as  much  as 
thou  wilt,  since  my  hair  would  fall  by  the  way.'  So 
the  youth  entered  the  stable,  and  took  a  large  vessel, 
for  he  wished  to  take  back  a  great  deal  of  seed ;  and  he 
loaded  himself  with  grain,  and  went  out  with  it.  And 
she  said  to  him,  *  How  much  have  you  [on  your  arm]  ? ' 
And  he  answered,  *  Two  measures  of  barley,  and  three 
measures  of  wheat — in  all,  I  have  five  measures  on  my 
arm.'  Then  she  spake  to  him  saying,  *  What  great 
strength  is  there  in  thee !  Indeed,  I  notice  thy  vigour 
every  day '  .  .  .  Then  she  seized  upon  him,  and  said 
to  him,  *  Come  and  let  us  lie  down  for  an  instant'  .  .  . 
The  youth  became  as  a  panther  with  fury,  on  account 
of  the  shameful  words  which  she  had  addressed  to 
him.  And  she  herself  was  alarmed  exceedingly.  He 
spake  to  her,  saying, '  Verily,  I  have  looked  upon  thee 
in  the  light  of  a  mother,  and  on  thy  husband  in  the 
lio-ht  of  a  father.     What  great  abomination  is  this 


178  BAB  YL ON  AND  EG  YPT. 

which  thou  hast  mentioned  to  me !  Do  not  repeat  it 
again,  and  I  will  not  speak  of  it  to  any  one.  Verily, 
I  will  not  permit  a  word  of  it  to  escape  my  mouth  to 
any  man.' 

"  He  took  up  his  load,  and  went  forth  to  the  field. 
He  rejoined  his  elder  brother,  and  they  accomplished 
the  task  of  their  labour.  And  when  the  time  of 
evening  arrived,  the  elder  brother  returned  to  his 
house.  His  younger  brother  [tarried]  behind  his 
cattle,  laden  with  all  the  things  of  the  field.  He  drove 
his  cattle  before  him,  that  they  might  lie  down  in  their 
stable. 

"  Behold,  the  wife  of  the  elder  brother  was  alarmed 
at  the  discourse  which  she  had  held.  She  made  her- 
self as  one  who  has  suffered  violence  from  a  man ;  for 
she  designed  to  say  to  her  husband, '  It  is  thy  younger 
brother  who  has  done  me  violence.' 

"  Her  husband  returned  home  at  evening,  according 
to  his  daily  wont.  He  came  to  his  house,  and  he 
found  his  wife  lying  as  if  murdered  by  a  ruffian.  She 
did  not  pour  water  on  his  hands,  according  to  her 
wont ;  she  did  not  light  the  lamp  before  him ;  his 
house  was  in  darkness.  She  was  lying  there,  all  uncov- 
ered. Her  husband  said  to  her,  *  Who  is  it  that  has 
been  conversing  with  thee?'  She  replied,  *  No  one  has 
been  conversing  with  me  except  thy  younger  brother. 
When  he  came  to  fetch  seed  for  thee  he  found  me 
sitting  alone,  and  he  said  to  me,  "  Come  and  let  us  lie 
down  for  an  instant."  That  is  what  he  said  to  me. 
But  I  did  not  listen  to  him.     "  Behold,  am  I  not  thy 


NOTICES  IN  GENESIS.  179 

mother ;  and  thy  elder  brother,  is  he  not  as  a  father  to 
thee  ?  " — that  is  what  I  said  to  him.  Then  he  became 
alarmed,  and  did  me  violence,  that  I  might  not  be  able 
to  report  the  matter  to  thee.  But  if  thou  lettest  him 
live,  I  shall  kill  myself  .  .  .  Then  the  elder  brother 
became  like  a  panther;  he  made  his  dagger  sharp,  and 
took  it  in  his  hand.  And  he  put  himself  behind  the 
door  of  his  stable,  in  order  to  kill  his  younger  brother, 
when  he  returned  at  even  to  bring  the  cattle  to  their 
stalls."  ^ 

It  is  unnecessary  to  pursue  the  story  further. 
Anepu  is  bent  on  killing  his  brother,  but  is  prevented. 
Potiphar,  with  a  moderation  which  seems  to  argue 
some  distrust  of  his  wife's  story,  is  content  to  imprison 
Joseph.  Innocence  in  both  cases  suffers,  and  then 
triumphs  ;  but  the  triumph  in  the  Egyptian  tale  is 
effected  by  repeated  metempsychosis,  and  therefore 
diverges  altogether  from  the  Mosaic  history.  Still,  it 
is  conceivable  that  the  Egyptian  novel,  written  several 
centuries  after  Joseph's  death,  was  based  upon  some 
traditional  knowledge  of  the  ordeal  through  which  he 
had  passed  unscathed,  and  the  ultimate  glory  to  which 
he  had  attained  as  ruler  of  Egypt.^ 

^  See  "  Records  of  the  Past,"  vol.  ii.,  pp.  139-142. 
*  Bata,  after  his  many  transmigrations,  is  finally  reborn  as  the  child 
of  an  Egyptian  princess,  and  rules  Egypt  for  thirty  years  (Ibid.,  p.  151). 


CHAPTER  XIV. 

FURTHER   NOTICES   OF   EGYPT    IN    GENESIS. 

The  history  of  Joseph  in  Egypt  after  he  was  thrown 
into  prison  by  Potiphar,  which  occupies  the  last  eleven 
chapters  of  Genesis,  is  delivered  to  us  at  too  great 
length  to  be  conveniently  made  the  subject  of  illustra- 
tion by  means  of  comment  on  a  series  of  passages. 
We  propose  therefore  to  view  it  in  the  mass,  as  a 
picture  of  Egypt  at  a  certain  period  of  its  history,  to 
be  determined  by  chronological  considerations,  and 
then  to  inquire  how  far  the  portraiture  given  corres- 
ponds to  what  is  known  to  us  of  the  Egypt  of  that 
time  from  profane  sources. 

The  time  of  Joseph's  visit  to  Egypt  is  variously 
given  by  chronologers.  Archbishop  Usher,  whose 
dates  are  followed  in  the  margin  of  the  English  Bible, 
as  published  by  authority,  regards  him  as  having 
resided  in  the  country  from  B.C.  1729  to  B.C.  1635. 
Most  other  chronologers  place  his  sojourn  earlier : 
Stuart  Poole ^  from  B.C.  1867  to  B.C.  1772;  Glinton^ 
from  B.C.  1862  to  B.C.  1770;  Hales ^  from  B.C.  1886  to 

^  "Dictionary  of  the  Bible,"  vol.  i.,  p.  508. 
^ "  Fasti  Hellenici,"  vol.  i.,  pp.  300,  320. 
'  "  Ancient  Chronology,"  vol.  i.,  p.  104,  et  seq. 
180 


NOTICES  IN  GENESIS.  i8i 


B.C.  1792.  Even  the  latest  of  these  dates  would  make 
his  arrival  anterior  to  the  commencement  of  the  New 
Empire,  which  was  certainly  not  earlier  than  B.C.  1 700. 
If  we  add  to  this  the  statement  of  George  the  Syncel- 
lus/  that  all  writers  agreed  in  making  him  the  prime 
minister  of  one  of  the  shepherd  kings,  we  seem  to 
have  sufficient  grounds  for  the  belief  that  the  Egypt 
of  his  time  was  that  of  the  Middle  Empire  or  Hyksos, 
an  Asiatic  people  who  held  Egypt  in  subjection  for 
some  centuries  before  the  great  rising  under  Aahmes, 
which  re-established  a  native  dynasty  upon  the  old 
throne  of  the  Pharaohs. 

Does  then  the  Egypt  of  the  later  chapters  of 
Genesis  correspond  to  this  time  ?  It  has  been  argued 
that  it  does  not,  because,  on  the  whole,  it  is  so  like  the 
Egypt  of  other  times.  We  have  the  king  depicted  in 
all  his  state,  with  his  signet  ring  upon  his  finger  (Gen. 
xli.  42),  with  chariots  to  ride  in  (ib.  43),  and  gold 
chains  to  give  away,  possessed  of  a  "  chief  butler " 
and  a  "chief  baker"  (ch.  xl.  9,  16),  able  to  imprison 
and  execute  whom  he  will  (ib.  3,  22),  with  "magicians" 
and  "  wise  men  "  for  counsellors  (ch.  xli.  8),  rich  in 
flocks  and  herds  (ch.  xlvii.  6),  despotic  over  the  people 
(ch.  xli.  34;  xlvii.  21),  with  no  fear  or  regard  for  any 
class  of  his  subjects  but  the  priests  (ch.  xlvii.  22,  26). 
We  have  the  priests  as  a  distinctly  privileged  class, 
supported  by .  the  monarch  in  a  time  of  famine, 
possessed  of  lands,  and  not  compelled  to  cede  to  the 
king  any  right  over  their  lands.  We  have  mention  of 
1  <*  Chrpnggraphia,"  p.  62,  B. 


1 82  BAB  YL  ON  AND  EGYPT. 

the  "  priest  of  On,"  or  Heliopolis,  as  a  magnate  of  the 
first  class,  with  whom  Joseph  did  not  disdain  to  ally 
himself  after  he  had  become  grand  vizier,  and  was  the 
next  person  in  the  kingdom  to  the  king  (ch.  xli.  45, 
50).  We  have  the  Egyptian  contempt  for  foreigners 
noted  in  the  statement  that  "  the  Egyptians  might  not 
eat  bread  with  the  Hebrews  "  (ch.  xliii.  32),  and  their 
special  aversion  to  herdsmen  touched  on  in  the  obser- 
vation that  "  every  shepherd  is  an  abomination  unto 
the  Egyptians  "  (ch.  xlvi.  34).  We  see  agriculture  the 
main  occupation  of  the  people,  yet  pasturing  of  cattle 
carried  on  upon  a  large  scale  in  the  Delta  (ch.  xlvii.  i- 
6).  We  find  embalming  practised,  and  a  special  class 
of  embalmers  (ch.  1.  2) ;  and  it  appears  that  embalmed 
bodies  are  placed  within  coffins  (ib.  26).  Chariots  and 
horses  are  tolerably  common,  for  when  Joseph  goes 
from  Egypt  to  Canaan  to  bury  his  father,  there  goes 
up  with  him  "  a  very  great  company,  both  chariots 
&nd  horsemen  "  (ib.  9),  while  "  horses,"  no  less  than 
cattle  and  asses,  are  among  the  domesticated  animals 
exchanged  by  the  Egyptians  generally  for  corn  (ch. 
xlvii.  17).  But,  though  horses  are  in  use  among  the 
people,  especially  the  official  classes  and  the  rich,  asses 
are  still  the  main  beasts  of  burden,  and  are  alone 
employed  in  the  conveyance  of  commodities  between 
Egypt  and  Canaan  (ch.  xlv.  23).  Wheeled  vehicles 
are  known,  and  are  used  for  the  conveyance  of  women 
and  children  (ib.  19-21).  Such  are  the  leading  features 
of  the  Egypt  depicted  by  the  writer  of  Genesis  in 
these  chapters.      The    description  is    said   to  be   too 


NOTICES  IN  GENESIS.  183 


thoroughly  Egyptian  to  be  a  true  representation  of  a 
time  when  a  foreign  dynasty  was  in  possession,  and  the 
nation  was  groaning  under  the  yoke  of  a  conqueror.^ 

The  general  answer  to  this  objection  seems  to  be 
that,  as  so  often  happens  when  a  race  of  superior  is 
overpowered  by  one  of  inferior  civilization,  the  con- 
querors rapidly  assimilated  themselves  in  most  respects 
to  the  conquered,  affected  their  customs,  and  even  to 
some  extent  adopted  their  prejudices.  M.  Chabas 
remarks  that  the  Hyksos,  or  shepherd  kings,  after  a 
time  became  ''Egyptianised."^  ''The  science  and  the 
usages  of  Egypt  introduced  themselves  among  them. 
They  surrounded  themselves  with  learned  men,  built 
temples,  encouraged  statuary,  while  at  the  same  time 
they  inscribed  their  own  names  on  the  statues  of  the 
Old  Empire,  which  were  still  standing,  in  the  place  of 
those  of  the  Pharaohs  who  had  erected  them.  It  is 
this  period  of  civilization  which  alone  has  left  us  the 
sphinxes,  the  statues,  and  the  inscriptions  which  recall 
the  art  of  Egypt ;  the  manners  of  the  foreign  con- 
querors had  by  this  time  been  sensibly  softened."^ 
And  again,  "Apepi,  the  last  shepherd  king,  was  an 
enlightened  prince,  who  maintained  a  college  of  men 
skilled  in  sacred  lore,  after  the  example  of  the 
Pharaohs  of  every  age,  and  submitted  all  matters  of 
importance  to  them  for  examination  before  he  formed 
any  decision.""*     The  Pharaoh  of  Joseph,  according  to 

^  Canon  Cook  in  the  "  Speaker's  Commentary,"  vol.  i.,  p.  449. 
2  "  Les  Pasteurs  en  Egypte,"  p.  30.  ^  Ibid.,  p.  33. 

*  Ibid.,  p.  31.     Bnigsch  and  Lenormant  take  the  same  view. 


1 84  BAB  YL  ON  AND  E  G  YPT. 

the  Syncellus/  was  this  very  Apepi,  the  last  shep- 
herd king,  the  predecessor  of  the  Aahmes,  who, 
after  a  long  and  severe  struggle,  expelled  the  Hyksos, 
and  re-established  in  Egypt  the  rule  of  a  native 
dynasty. 

Thus,  it  was  to  have  been  expected  that,  if  Joseph 
lived  under  Apepi,  or  indeed  under  any  one  of  the 
later  shepherd  kings,  a  description  of  the  Egypt  of  his 
day  would  greatly  resemble  any  true  description  of 
that  country  either  in  earlier  or  later  times,  and 
possess  but  few  distinctive  features.  Still  sojne  such 
distinctive  features  might  have  been  expected  to  show 
themselves,  and  it  must  be  our  object  now  to  inquire, 
first,  what  they  would  be ;  and  secondly,  how  far,  if  at 
all,  they  appear  in  the  narrative. 

First,  then,  what  distinctive  features  would  there  be 
separating  and  marking  off  the  Second  Empire  from 
the  First,  the  Hyksos  rule  from  that  of  the  old 
Pharaohs  who  built  the  Pyramids,  set  up  the  first 
obelisks,  and  accomplished  the  great  works  in  the 
Fayoum  ?  In  the  first  place,  their  residence  would  be 
different.  The  pyramid  kings  lived  at  Memphis, 
above  the  apex  of  the  Delta,  in  the  (comparatively 
speaking)  narrow  valley  of  the  Nile,  before  the  river 
enters  on  the  broad  tract  which  it  must  have  gradually 
formed  by  its  own  deposits.  The  great  monarchs  of 
the  obelisk  and  Fayoum  period — those  assigned  by 
Manetho  to  his  eleventh,  twelfth,  and  thirteenth 
dynasties — lived  at  Thebes,  more  than  three  hundred 
^  "  Chronographia,"  p.  62,  B. 


NOTICES  IN  GENESIS.  185 


miles  further  up  the  course  of  the  Nile,  in  a  region 
from  which  the  Delta  could  only  be  reached  by  a 
lengthy  and  toilsome  journey  along  the  river  bank,  or 
by  a  voyage  down  its  channel.  The  Hyksos  mon- 
archs,  on  the  other  hand,  fixed  their  residence  in  the 
Delta  itself;  they  selected  Tanis — an  ancient  Egyptian 
town  of  considerable  importance — for  the  main  seat 
of  their  court.^  While  maintaining  a  great  fortified 
camp  at  Avaris,  on  their  eastern  frontier,  where  they 
lived  sometimes,  they  still  more  favoured  the  quiet 
Egyptian  city  on  the  Tanitic  branch  of  the  Nile,  where 
they  could  pass  their  time  away  from  the  sound  of 
arms,  amid  ancient  temples  and  sanctuaries  dedicated 
to  various  Egyptian  gods,  which  they  allowed  to 
stand,  if  they  did  not  even  use  them  for  their  own 
worship.  The  Delta  had  never  previously  been  the 
residence  of  Egyptian  kings,  and  it  did  not  again 
become  their  residence  until  the  time  of  the  nineteenth 
dynasty,  shortly  before  the  Exodus. 

A  second  peculiarity  of  the  Hyksos  period,  belong- 
ing especially  to  its  later  portion,  is  to  be  found  in 
the  religious  views  professed,  proclaimed,  and  enjoined 
upon  subject  princes.  Apepi,  according  to  the  MS. 
known  as  "the  First  Sallier  papyrus,"  made  a  great 
movement  in  Lower  Egypt  in  favour  of  monotheism. 
Whereas  previously  the  shepherd  kings  had  allowed 
among  their  subjects,  if  they  had  not  even  practised 
themselves,  the  worship  of  a  multitude  of  gods,  Apepi 
"took  to  himself"  a  single  god  ''for  lord,  refusing  to 
^Brugsch,  "History  of  Egypt,"  vol.  i.,  pp.  236-7,  ist  edition. 


1 86  BAB YL ON  AND  EGYPT. 

serve  any  other  god  in  the  whole  land."^  According 
to  the  Egyptian  writer  of  the  M  S.,  the  name  under 
which  he  worshipped  his  god  was  "  Sutech " ;  and 
some  critics  have  supposed  that  he  chose  this  god  out 
of  the  existing  Egyptian  Pantheon,  because  he  was 
the  god  of  the  North,  where  his  own  dominion  espe- 
cially lay.^  But  Sutech,  though  undoubtedly  he  had 
a  place  in  the  Egyptian  Pantheon  from  very  ancient 
times,^  seems  to  have  been  essentially  an  Asiatic  god, 
the  special  deity  of  the  Hittite  nation,^  with  which 
there  is  reason  to  believe  that  the  shepherd  kings  were 
closely  connected.  Apepi,  moved  by  a  monotheistic 
impulse,  selected  Sutech,  we  should  suppose,  rather 
out  of  his  own  gods  than  out  of  the  Egyptian  deities, 
and  determined  that,  whatever  had  been  the  case  pre- 
viously, henceforth  he  would  renounce  polytheism,  and 
worship  one  only  lord  and  god,  the  god  long  known 
to  his  nation,  and  to  his  own  ancestors,^  under  the 
name  above  mentioned.  There  is  reason  to  believe 
that  he  did  not  identify  him  with  the  Egyptian  god, 
Set,  or  Sutech,  but  rather  with  some  form  or  other  of 
the  Egyptian  sun-god,  or  else  with  their  sun-gods 
generally,  since  he  appointed  sacrifice  to  be  made  to 
Sutech,  "  with  all  the  rites  that  are  performed  in  the 
temple  of   Ra-Harmachis,"*^  who  was   one  of  these 

1  See  "  Records  of  the  Past,"  vol.  viii.,  p.  3. 
^Chabas,  "  Les  Pasteuis  en  Egypte,"  p.  35. 
"  3  Mariette,  "  Lettre  a  M.  le  Vicomte  de  Rouge,"  in  the  Revue  Archeo- 
log! que,  vol.  v.,  p.  303. 

*  "  Records  of  the  Past,"  vol.  iv.,  p.  31.  ^Ibid.,  p.  36. 

^Ibid.,  vol.  viii.,  p.  3. 


NOTICES  IN  GENESIS.  187 


gods,  and  required  the  vassal  king  of  Thebes,  Ra- 
Sekenen,  to  neglect  the  worship  of  all  the  other  gods 
honoured  in  his  part  of  Egypt,  excepting  Ammon- 
Ra,  who  was  another  of  them.  Sutech,  among  the 
Hittites,  seems  to  have  been  equivalent  to  Baal,  and 
was  certainly  a  sun-god,^  probably  identified  with  the 
material  sun  itself,  but  viewed  as  having  also  a  spiritual 
nature,  and  as  the  creator  and  sustainer  of  the  universe. 
Apepi's  great  temple  of  Sutech  at  Tanis  was  the 
natural  outcome  of  his  exclusive  worship  of  this  god, 
and  showed  forth  in  a  tangible  and  conspicuous  form 
the  earnestness  of  his  piety. 

Among  the  changes  in  manners  and  customs  belong- 
ing to  the  Middle  Empire,  there  is  one  which  cannot 
be  gainsaid — the  introduction  of  the  horse.  The 
horse,  which  is  wholly  absent  from  the  remains, 
written  or  sculptured,  of  the  Old  Empire,  appears  as 
well  known  and  constantly  employed  in  the  very 
earliest  records  of  the  New,  and  must  consequently 
have  made  its  appearance  in  the  interval.  Hence  it 
has  been  argued  by  those  best  acquainted  with  the 
ancient  remains  that  the  military  successes  of  the 
Hyksos,  and  especially  their  conquest  of  Egypt,  were 
probably  the  result  to  a  considerable  extent  of  their 
invading  the  country  with  a  chariot  force  and  with 
cavalry  at  a  time  when  the  Egyptians  fought  wholly 
on  foot.  Neither  horses  nor  chariots,  nor  even 
carts,  were  known  under  the  Pharaohs  of  the  Old 
Empire;  they  were  employed  largely  from  the  very 
1 "  Records  of  the  Past,"  vol.  iv.,  p.  28,  par.  8. 


i88  BAB  YL  ON  AND  E G  YPT. 

beginning  of  the  New  Empire,  the  change  having 
been  effected  by  the  empire  which  occupied  the  inter- 
vening space. 

Before  proceeding  further,  let  us  consider  how  these 
characteristics  suit  the  Egypt  of  Joseph.  First,  then, 
the  indications  of  Genesis,  though  not  very  precise, 
decidedly  favour  the  view  that  the  king  is  residing  in 
the  Delta.  He  receives  in  person  the  brethren  of 
Joseph  on  their  arrival  in  the  land,  and  even  has  an 
interview  with  the  aged  Jacob  himself  (Gen.  xlvii.  7- 
10),  whom  his  son  would  certainly  not  have  presented 
to  him  if  the  court  had  not  been  near  at  hand. 
Goshen,  the  eastern  portion  of  the  Delta,  is  chosen 
for  the  residence  of  the  family,  especially  because, 
dwelling  there,  they  will  be  "  near  to  Joseph  "  (ch.  xlv. 
10),  who  must  have  been  in  constant  attendance  on 
the  monarch.  "  All  the  servants  of  Pharaoh,  the 
elders  of  his  house,  and  all  the  elders  of  the  land  of 
Egypt"  (ch.  1.  7)  would  scarcely  have  accompanied 
the  body  of  Jacob  to  the  cave  of  Machpelah  unless 
the  court  had  been  residing  in  Lower  Egypt.  Bishop 
Harold  Browne,  who  writes  as  a  common-sense  critic, 
and  not  as  an  Egyptologist,  well  observes,  "Joseph 
placed  his  brethren  naturally  on  the  confines  of  Egypt 
nearest  to  Palestine,  and  yet  near  himself.  It  is  prob- 
able that  Memphis  or  Tanis  was  then  the  metropolis  of 
Egyptr^  But  both  before  and  after  the  shepherd 
kings  the  capital  for  many  hundred  years  was  Thebes. 

Secondly,  there  are  indications  in  the  later  chapters 

*  "Speaker's  Commentary,"  vol.  i.,  p.  215. 


NOTICES  IN  GENESIS.  189 


of  Genesis  that  the  Pharaoh  of  the  time  was  a  mono- 
theist.  Not  only  does  he  make  no  protest  against  the 
pronounced  monotheism  of  Joseph  (ch.  xh.  16,  25, 
32),  as  Nebuchadnezzar  does  against  that  of  Shadrach, 
Meshach,  and  Abed-nego,  when  he  draws  the  con- 
clusion from  their  escape  that  "no  other  god  can 
deliver  after  this  sort;'  but  he  uses  himself  the  most 
decidedly  monotheistic  language  when  he  says  to  his 
nobles,  "  Can  we  find  such  a  one  as  this  is — a  man  in 
whom  the  Spirit  of  God  is  ?  "  (ib.  38),  and  again  when 
he  addresses  Joseph  as  follows  :  "  Forasmuch  as  God 
hath  shozved  thee  all  this,  there  is  none  so  discreet  and 
wise  as  thou  art "  (ib.  39).  No  such  distinct  recogni- 
tion of  the  unity  of  God  is  ascribed  either  to  the 
Pharaoh  of  the  Old  Empire  who  received  Abraham 
(ch.  xii.  1 5-20),  or  to  those  of  the  New  Empire  who 
came  into  contact  with  Moses  (Exod.  i-xiv.). 

The  contrast  between  the  Egypt  of  Abraham's  time 
and  that  of  the  time  of  Joseph  in  respect  of  horses  has 
often  been  noticed.  As  the  absence  of  horses  from 
the  list  of  the  presents  made  to  Abraham  (ch.  xii.  16) 
indicates  with  sufficient  clearness  the  time  of  the  Old 
Empire,  so  the  mention  of  horses,  chariots,  and 
wagons  in  connection  with  Joseph  (ch.  xii.  43  ;  xlvi. 
29;  xlvii.  17;  1.  9)  makes  his  time  either  that  of  the 
Middle  Empire  or  of  the  New.  The  fact  that  the 
possession  of  horses  does  not  seem  to  be  as  yet  very 
common  points  to  the  Middle  Empire  as  the  more 
probable  of  the  two. 

Certain  leading  features,  moreover,  of  the  narrative, 


190 


BAB  YL  ON  AND  EG  YPT. 


which  have  been  reckoned  among  its  main  difficulties, 
either  cease  to  be  difficulties  at  all,  or  are  reduced  to 
comparative  insignificance,  if,  in  accordance  with  tra- 
dition and  with  the  most  probable  chronology,  we 
regard  Joseph  as  the  minister  of  a  shepherd  king. 

The  native  Egyptian  monarchs  had  an  extreme  jeal- 
ousy of  their  Eastern  neighbours.  The  East  was  the 
quarter  from  which  Egypt  lay  most  open  to  invasion, 
and  from  the  later  times  of  the  Old  Empire  down  to 
the  twentieth  dynasty  in  the  New  there  was  continual 
fear,  when  a  native  dynasty  sat  upon  the  throne,  lest 
immigrants  from  these  parts  should  by  degrees  filch 
away  from  Egypt  the  possession  of  the  Delta.  Small 
bodies  of  Asiatics,  like  those  who  came  with  Abraham, 
or  the  thirty-seven  Amu  under  Abusha,*  might  occa- 
sionally be  received  with  favour,  to  sojourn  or  to  dwell 
in  the  land  ;  but  larger  settlements  would  have  been 
very  distasteful.  An  early  king  of  the  twelfth  dynasty 
built  a  wall  "  to  keep  off  the  Sakti,"  as  the  Asiatics  of 
these  parts  were  called,^  and  such  powerful  monarchs 
as  Seti  I.  and  Rameses  11.  followed  his  example.  The 
only  kings  who  were  friendly  to  the  Asiatics,  and  likely 
to  receive  a  large  body  of  settlers  with  favour,  were 
the  Hyksos,  Asiatics  themselves,  whom  every  such 
settlement  strengthened  against  the  revolt,  which 
always  threatened,  of  their  Egyptian  subjects.  Now 
the  family  and  dependants  of  Jacob  were  a  large  body 
of  settlers.     Abraham  had  three  hundred  and  eighteen 

^Biugsch,  "History  of  Egypt,"  vol.  i.,  p.  157. 
''■  "  Records  of  the  Past,"  vol.  vi.,  p.  135. 


NOTICES  IN  GENESIS.  191 

adult  male  servants  born  in  his  house  (Gen.  xiv.  14). 
Jacob's  attendants,  when  he  returned  from  serving 
Laban,  formed  '*  two  bands"  (Gen.  xxxii.  10),  literally 
"two  armies."  The  number  of  those  who  entered 
Egypt  with  Jacob  has  been  reasonably  calculated  at 
"  several  thousands."  ^  To  place  such  a  body  of 
foreigners  "  in  the  best  of  the  land  "  (ch.  xlvii.  6,  11), 
on  the  eastern  frontier,  where  they  could  readily  give 
admission  to  others,  is  what  no  king  of  either  the  Old 
or  the  New  Empire  would  have  been  likely  to  have 
done ;  but  it  is  exactly  what  might  have  been  expected 
of  one  of  the  Hyksos. 

Again,  the  sudden  elevation  of  a  foreigner  from  the 
slave  condition  to  the  second  place  in  the  kingdom, 
the  putting  him  above  all  the  Egyptians  and  making 
them  bow  down  to  him  (ch.  xli.  43),  and  the  giving 
him  in  marriage  the  daughter  of  the  high-priest  of 
Heliopolis  (ib.  45),  though  perhaps  within  the  pre- 
rogative of  any  Egyptian  king,  who,  as  a  god  upon 
earth, — "  son  of  the  Sun," — could  do  no  wrong,  are 
yet  exceedingly  unlikely  things,  if  Egypt  were  in  its 
normal  condition.  It  is  far  from  paralleled  by  the 
"story  of  Saneha,"  even  if  that  story  is  a  true  one, 
and  not  a  novelette;  for  Saneha's  rise  is  very  gradual; 
he  is  a  courtier  in  his  youth;  he  commits  an  offence, 
and  flies  to  a  foreign  land,  where  he  passes  the  greater 
part  of  his  life ;  it  is  not  until  he  is  an  old  man  that 
his  pardon  reaches  him,  and  he  returns,  and  is  restored 
to  favour ;  nor  does  he  rise  even  then  to  a  rank  at  all 
1  Kurtz,  "  History  of  the  Old  Covenant,"  vo].  ii.,  p.  149,  E.  T. 


192 


BAB  YL  ON  AND  EG  YPT. 


equal  to  that  of  Joseph.^  Joseph's  history  would  have 
been  "  incredible "  if  Egypt  had  never  had  foreign 
rulers.^  But  a  Hyksos  monarch  would  be  trammelled 
by  none  of  the  feelings  or  restraints  natural  to  an 
Egyptian.  A  foreigner  himself,  he  would  be  glad  to 
advance  a  foreigner,  would  not  be  very  careful  of 
offending  a  high-priest,  and  would  feel  more  confidence 
in  committing  important  affairs  to  a  stranger  wholly, 
dependent  upon  himself  than  to  a  native  who  might 
at  any  time  turn  traitor. 

Our  limits  will  not  allow  us  to  treat  this  point  at 
greater  length.  It  is  necessary,  however,  before  con- 
cluding this  chapter,  to  notice  briefly  two  objections 
which  Genesis  is  supposed  to  offer  to  the  traditional 
view  of  Joseph's  place  in  Egyptian  history.  The  first 
is  the  designation  of  Goshen  in  one  passage  (ch.  xlvii. 
ii)  as  "the  land  of  Rameses."  Now  Rameses  is  a 
name  which  first  appears  in  Egypt  under  the  New 
Empire,  and  a  "  land  of  Rameses  "  is  not  likely  to 
have  existed  until  there  had  been  a  monarch  of  the 
name,  which  first  happened  under  the  nineteenth 
dynasty.  But  it  is  quite  possible,  as  Bishop  Harold 
Browne  suggests,  that  the  writer  of  Genesis  may  have 
used  the  phrase,  "  land  of  Rameses,"  by  anticipation,^ 
to  designate  the  tract  so  called  in  his  day.  This 
would  be  merely  as  if  a  modern  writer  were  to  say 
that  the  Romans  under  Julius  Caesar  invaded  England, 

*  "  Records  of  the  Past,"  vol.  vi.,  pp.  135-150. 

2  Stuart  Poole  in  Smith's  "  Diet,  of  the  Bible,"  vol,  i.,  p.  509. 

*"  Speaker's  Commentary,"  vol.  i.,  p.  221.  . 


NOTICES  IN  GENESIS.  193 

or  that  Pontius  Pilate,  when  recalled  from  Judaea,  was 
banished  to  France. 

The  other  objection  is  drawn  from  the  statement 
that  in  Joseph's  time  "  every  shepherd  was  an  abomi- 
nation to  the  Egyptians  "  (ch.  xlvi.  34).  This  is  said 
to  be  "quite  conclusive"  against  the  view  that  the 
Pharaoh  of  Joseph  was  a  shepherd  king.^  But  it  is 
admitted  that  the  prejudice  was  anterior  to  the  invasion 
of  the  Hyksos,  and  appears  on  the  monuments  of  the 
Old  Empire.  It  would  certainly  not  have  been 
lessened  by  the  Hyksos  conquest,  nor  can  the  shep- 
herd kings  be  supposed  to  have  been  ignorant  of  it. 
If  it  was  a  caste  prejudice,  it  would  have  been  quite 
beyond  their  power  to  put  down  ;  and  nothing  would 
have  been  left  for  them  but  to  bear  with  it,  and  make 
the  best  of  it.  This  is  what  they  seem  to  have  done. 
When  men  of  the  nomadic  races  were  feasted  at  the 
Hyksos  court,  they  were  feasted  separately  from  the 
Egyptians  (ch.  xliii.  32) ;  and  when  a  nomad  tribe  had 
to  be  located  on  Egyptian  territory,  it  was  placed  in  a 
position  which  brought  it  as  little  as  possible  into  con- 
tact with  the  natives.  Pharaoh  had  already  put  his 
own  herdsmen  in  Goshen  (ch.  xlvii.  6),  with  the  view 
of  isolating  them.  In  planting  the  Israelite  settlers 
there,  he  did  but  follow  the  same  principle.  Like  a 
wise  ruler,  he  arranged  to  keep  apart  those  diverse 
elements  in  the  population  of  his  country  which  were 
sure  not  to  amalgamate. 

*"  Speaker's  Commentary,"  vol.  i.,  p.  449,  note  t^t^. 


CHAPTER  XV. 

THE    NOTICES   OF   EGYPT    IN    EXODUS. 

"  Now  there  arose  up  a  new  king  over  Egypt,  which  knew  not 
Joseph.  And  he  said  unto  his  people,  Behold,  the  people  of  the 
children  of  Israel  are  more  and  mightier  than  we ;  come  on,  let  us  deal 
wisely  with  them,  lest  they  multiply,  and  it  come  to  pass  that,  when  there 
falleth  out  any  war,  they  join  also  unto  our  enemies,  and  fight  against 
us,  and  so  get  them  up  out  of  the  land.  Therefore  they  did  set  over 
them  taskmasters,  to  afflict  them  with  their  burdens.  And  they  built 
for  Pharaoh  treasure-cities,  Pithom  and  Raamses." — ExoD.  i.  8-19. 

The  question  of  the  period  of  Egyptian  history  into 

which  the  severe  oppression  of  the  IsraeHtes,  and  their 

"exodus"  from  Egypt,  are  to  be  regarded  as  faUing,  is 

one  of  no  Httle  interest,  and  at  the  same  time  of  no 

Httle  difficulty.     In  the  last  chapter  we  saw  reason  for 

accepting  the  view  that  the   Pharaoh  whom   Joseph 

served  was  Apepi,  the  last  king  of  the  seventeenth 

(shepherd)   dynasty.      In    order,   however,  to    obtain 

from  this  fact  any  guidance  as  to  the  dynasty,  and  still 

more  as  to  the  kings,  under  whom  the  events  took 

place  which  are  related  in  the  first  section  of  the  Book 

of  Exodus  (chs.  i.-xiv.),  we  have  to  determine,  first  of 

all,  what  was  the  length  of  the  Egyptian  sojourn.    But 

here  we  find  ourselves  in  the  jaws  of  a  great  contro- 
194 


NOTICES  IN  EXODUS.  195 


versy.  Taking  the  Authorised  Version  as  our  sole 
guide,  we  should  indeed  think  the  matter  plain 
enough,  for  there  we  are  told  (ch.  xii.  40,  41),  that 
"  the  sojourning  of  the  children  of  Israel,  who  dwelt 
in  Egypt,  was /<??/r  hundred  and  thirty  years;  and  it 
came  to  pass  at  the  end  of  the  four  Jiundred  and  thirty 
years,  even  the  selfsame  day  it  came  to  pass,  that  all 
the  hosts  of  the  Lord  went  out  from  the  land  of 
Egypt."  If  we  consult  the  Hebrew  original,  the  plain- 
ness and  certainty  seems  increased,  for  there  we  find 
that  the  words  run  thus  : — "  The  sojourning  of  the 
children  of  Israel,  zuhieh  they  sojourned  in  Egypt,  was 
four  hundred  and  thirty  years,''  which  seems  to  leave 
no  loophole  of  escape  from  the  conclusion  that  the 
four  hundred  and  thirty  years  mentioned  are  those  of 
Israel's  stay  in  Egypt.  And  it  is  quite  admitted  that 
thus  far — if  this  were  all  the  evidence — there  could  be 
no  controversy  upon  the  subject.  Doubt  arises  from 
the  fact  that  in  the  two  most  ancient  versions  of  Exodus 
that  we  possess  the  passage  runs  differently.  We  read 
in  the  Septuagint,  "  The  sojourning  of  the  children  of 
Israel,  which  they  sojourned  in  Egypt  and  in  the  land 
of  Canaan,  was  four  hundred  and  thirty  years;"  and 
in  the  Samaritan  version,  "  The  sojourning  of  the 
children  of  Israel  a?id  of  their  fatJiers,  which  they 
sojourned  in  the  land  of  Canaaji  and  in  Egypt,  was 
four  hundred  and  thirty  years."  Nor  is  this  the  whole. 
St.  Paul,  it  is  observed,  writing  to  the  Galatians  (ch.  iii. 
17),  makes  the  giving  of  the  law  from  Mount  Sinai 
"  four  hundred  and  thirty  years  after,"  not  the  going 


196  BAB YL ON  AND  EGYPT. 

down  into  Egypt,  but  the  entering  into  covenant  with 
Abraham.  And  it  is  further  argued  that  the  genealo- 
gies for  the  time  of  the  stay  in  Egypt  are  incompatible 
with  the  long  period  of  four  hundred  and  thirty  years, 
and  require  the  cutting  down  of  the  time  to  the 
dimensions  implied  by  the  Septuagint  and  Samaritan 
translations.  This  time  is  two  hundred  and  fifteen 
years,  or  exactly  half  the  other,  since  it  was  two 
hundred  and  fifteen  years  fi-om  the  promise  made  to 
Abraham  until  the  entering  of  the  Israelites  into 
Egypt. 

Now,  if  the  Exodus  was  but  two  hundred  and 
fifteen  years  after  any  date  in  the  reign  of  Apepi,  it 
must  have  fallen  within  the  period  assigned  by  Mane- 
tho  and  the  monuments  to  the  eighteenth  dynasty. 
But  if  we  are  to  substitute  four  hundred  and  thirty 
years  for  two  hundred  and  fifteen,  it  must  have 
belonged  rather  to  the  later  part  of  the  nineteenth. 
Let  us  consider,  therefore,  whether  on  the  whole  the 
weight  of  argument  is  in  favour  of  the  shorter  or  the 
longer  term  of  years. 

First,  then,  with  regard  to  the  versions.  The 
Hebrew  text  must  always  be  considered  of  paramount 
authority,  unless  there  is  reason  to  suspect  that  it  has 
been  tampered  with.  But,  in  this  case,  there  is  no 
such  reason.  Had  the  clause  inserted  by  the  LXX. 
existed  in  the  Hebrew  original,  there  is  no  assignable 
ground  on  which  we  can  imagine  it  left  out.  There 
is,  on  the  other  hand,  a  readily  conceivable  ground  for 
the    insertion    of  the   clause   by  the    LXX.  in   their 


NOTICES  IN  EXODUS. 


[97 


anxiety  to  harmonise  their  chronology  with  the 
Egyptian  system  prevalent  in  their  day.  Further,  the 
clause  has  the  appearance  of  an  insertion,  being  irrele- 
vant to  the  narrative,  which  is  naturally  concerned  at 
this  point  with  Egypt,  and  with  Egypt  only.  The 
Samaritan  version  may  appear  at  first  sight  to  lend  the 
Septuagint  confirmation ;  but  a  little  examination  shows 
the  contrary.  The  Samaritan  translator  has  the  Sep- 
tuagint before  him,  but  is  dissatisfied  with  the  way  in 
which  his  Greek  predecessor  has  amended  the  Hebrew 
text.  His  version  is  an  amendment  of  the  Greek  text 
in  two  points.  First,  he  sees  that  the  name  "  children 
of  Is7'ael''  could  not  properly  be  given  to  any  but  the 
descendants  of  Jacob,  and  therefore  he  inserts  the 
clause  "  and  of  their  fathers."  Secondly,  he  observes 
that  the  LXX.  have  inverted  the  historical  order  of 
the  sojourns  in  Egypt  and  in  Canaan,  placing  that 
in  Egypt  first.  This  he  corrects  by  a  transposition. 
No  one  can  suppose  that  he  derived  his  emendations 
from  the  Hebrew.  He  evolved  them  from  his  inner 
consciousness.  He  gave  his  readers,  not  what  Moses 
had  said,  but  what,  in  his  opinion,  he  ought  to 
have  said. 

Secondly,  with  respect  to  St.  Paul's  statement  to  the 
Galatians,  it  is  to  be  borne  in  mind  that  he  wrote  to 
Greek-speaking  Jews,  whose  only  Bible  was  the  Sep- 
tuagint Version,  and  that  he  could  not  but  follow  it 
unless  he  was  prepared  to  intrude  on  them  a  chrono- 
logical discussion,  which  would  in  no  way  have 
advanced  his  argument.     His  argument  is  that  the 


198  BAB  YL  ON  AND  E  G  YP T. 

law,  having  been  given  long  after  the  covenant  made 
with  Abraham,  could  not  disannul  it;  how  long  after 
was  of  no  consequence,  whether  four  hundred  and 
thirty  or  six  hundred  and  forty-five  years. 

Thirdly,  the  genealogies  of  the  period,  as  given  in 
the  Pentateuch,  contain  undoubtedly  no  more  than  six 
names — in  fact,'  vary  between  four  and  six — which 
taken  by  itself,  is  doubtless  an  argument  for  the 
shorter  period.  But  {a)  the  Jews  constantly  abbrevi- 
ated genealogies  by  the  omission  of  a  portion  of  the 
names  (Ezra  vii.  1-5;  Matt.i.  2-16;  comp.  i  Chron. 
ix.  4-19  with  Neh.  xi.  4-22);  and  (J?)  there  is  one 
genealogy  belonging  to  the  period,  given  in  i  Chron. 
vii.  22-27,  that  of  Joshua,  which  contains  ten  names. 
The  Hebrews,  at  this  portion  of  their  history,  and 
indeed  to  a  considerably  later  date,  reckoned  a  gene- 
ration at  forty  years,  so  that  the  ten  generations  from 
Jacob  to  Joshua,  who  was  fully  grown  up  at  the  time 
of  the  Exodus  (Exod.  xvii.  9-13),  would  cover  four 
hundred  years,  or  not  improbably  a  little  more. 

Another  argument  in  favour  of  the  longer  date  is 
derivable  from  the  terms  of  the  announcement  made 
to  Abraham  with  respect  to  the  Egyptian  servitude: — 
"  Know  of  a  surety,  that  thy  seed  shall  be  a  stranger 
in  a  land  that  is  not  theirs,  and  shall  serve  them,  and 
they  shall  afflict  them  four  hundred  years ;  and  also 
that  nation,  whom  they  shall  serve,  will  I  judge;  and 
afterward  shall  they  come  out  with  great  substance  " 
(Gen.  XV.  13,  14).  In  this  prophecy  but  one  land  is 
spoken  of,  and  but  one  people ;  this  people  is  to  afflict 


NO  TICES  IN  EXOD  US.  1 99 

Israel  for  four  hundred  years ;  it  is  then  to  be  judged; 
and,  after  the  judgment,  Israel  is  to  ''come  out,"  to 
come  out,  moreover,  with  great  substance.  Nothing 
is  said  that  can  by  any  possibility  allude  to  the 
Canaanites,  or  the  land  of  Canaan.  One  continuous 
affliction  in  one  country,  and  by  one  people,  lasting — 
in  round  numbers — four  hundred  years,  is  announced 
with  the  utmost  plainness. 

But  the  crowning  argument  of  all,  which  ought  to 
be  regarded  as  completely  settling  the  question,  is  that 
derivable  from  the  numbers  of  the  Israelites  on  enter- 
ing and  on  quitting  Egypt.  Their  numbers,  indeed, 
on  entering,  cannot  be  definitely  fixed,  since  they  went 
down  to  Egypt  "  with  their  households  "  (Exod.  i.  i), 
and  these,  to  judge  by  that  of  Abraham  (Gen.  xiv.  14), 
were  very  numerous.  Still  no  writer  has  supposed 
that  altogether  the  settlers  exceeded  more  than  a  few 
— say  two  or  three — thousands.^  On  quitting  Egypt, 
they  were,  at  the  lowest  estimate,  two  millions.  What 
time,  then,  is  required,  under  favourable  circumstances, 
for  the  expansion  of  a  body  (say)  of  two  thousand 
persons  into  one  a  thousand  times  that  number  ? 

There  are  writers  who  have  argued  that  population 
may  double  itself  in  the  space  of  fifteen,  nay,  in  that 
of  thirteen  years.^  But  I  know  of  no  proved  instance 
of  the  kind  where  there  has  not  been  a  large  influx 

1  Kurtz  ("History  of  the  Old  Covenant,"  vol.  ii.,  p.  149)  uses  the 
vague  expression,  "several  thousands."  Dean  Payne  Smith,  in  his 
"  Bampton  Lectures"  (p.  89),  suggests  three  thousand. 

2 Clinton,  "Fasti  Hellenici,"  vol.  i.,  p.  294. 


200  BAB  YL ON  AND  EGYPT. 

through  immigration.  No  increase,  or,  at  any  rate,  no 
important  increase,  of  the  Israelites  in  Egypt  can  be 
assigned  to  this  cause.  They  multiplied,  as  is  dis- 
tinctly implied  in  the  narrative,  in  the  ordinary  way, 
without  foreign  accretion.  It  is  reasonable,  therefore, 
to  apply  to  them  Mr.  Malthus's  law  for  the  natural 
increase  of  population  by  descent  under  favourable 
circumstances.  Now  this  is  a  doubling  of  the  popula- 
tion, not  every  thirteen,  or  every  fifteen,  but  every 
twenty-five  years.^  By  this  law  two  thousand  persons 
would,  in  two  hundred  and  fifteen  years,  have  multi- 
plied to  the  extent,  not  of  two  millions,  but  of  less 
than  one  million.  The  law,  moreover,  only  acts  where 
population  is  scanty,  where  the  sanitary  circumstances 
are  favourable,  and  where  the  means  of  subsistence 
are  wholesome,  and  readily  obtained.  Long  before 
the  time  that  the  Israelites  reached  a  quarter  of  a 
million,  most  of  the  artificial  checks  which  tend  to 
keep  down  the  natural  increase  of  population  would 
have  begun  to  operate  among  them.  The  territory 
assigned  them  was  not  a  very  large  one,  and  they  were 
not  its  sole  inhabitants  (Gen.  xlvii.  6 ;  Exod.  iii.  22, 
xii.  31-36).  It  would  soon  be  pretty  densely  peopled. 
The  tasks  in  which  they  were  employed  by  their 
Egyptian  lords,  from  the  time  that  the  severe  oppres- 
sion began  (Exod.  i.  13,  14),  could  not  be  favourable 
to  health.  They  were  no  doubt  sufficiently  well  fed, 
as  slaves   usually  are,  but  not  on  a  very  wholesome 

^ "  Essay  on  Population,"  vol.  i.,  p  8 ;  "  Encyclopoedia  Britannica," 
vol.  xviii.,  p.  340. 


NOTICES  IN  EXODUS. 


dietary  (Num.  xi.  5).  The  rate  of  increase  would 
naturally  fall  under  these  circumstances,  and  it  may 
ere  long  have  taken  them  fifty  years  to  double  their 
numbers,  which  is  about  the  rate  now  existing  among 
ourselves.  Supposing  them  to  have  been  two  thousand 
at  the  first,  and  to  have  doubled  their  numbers  at  the 
end  of  the  first  twenty-five  years,  but  to  have  required 
five  years  longer  for  each  successive  duplication  until 
the  full  term  of  fifty  years  was  reached,  it  would  have 
taken  them  four  hundred  and  twenty-five  years  to 
reach  the  amount  of  two  millions. 

Altogether  it  is  perfectly  clear  that  an  increase 
which  is  abnormal,  and  requires  some  explanation,  if 
it  be  regarded  as  occupying  the  space  of  four  hundred 
and  thirty  years,  must  be  most  unlikely,  if  not  impos- 
sible, to  have  occurred  in  half  that  time. 

If  then  we  take  four  hundred  and  thirty  years  from 
the  early  part  of  Apepi's  reign,  and  follow  the  line  of 
the  Egyptian  kings,  as  we  find  it  in  Manetho,  or  in  the 
monuments,  we  are  carried  on  beyond  the  time  of  the 
eighteenth  dynasty  into  that  of  the  nineteenth,  and 
have  to  look  for  the  monarchs  mentioned  in  Exodus 
among  those  who  reigned  in  Egypt  between  the  close 
of  the  eighteenth  dynasty  and  the  commencement  of 
the  twentieth. 

Before  proceeding,  however,  with  this  inquiry,  it 
seems  natural  to  ask,  Is  there  no  tradition  with  respect 
to  the  time  of  the  Exodus  in  Egyptian  history,  as  we 
found  that  there  was  with  respect  to  the  time  of 
Joseph  ;  and  if  there  is  any  such  tradition,  what  is  it  ? 


202  BABYLON  AND  EG  YP  T. 

The  Egyptian  tradition  was  delivered  at  great  length 
by  Manetho,  whose  account  is  preserved  to  us  in 
Josephus.^  It  was  also  reported  more  briefly  by 
Chaeremon.^  It  placed  the  Exodus  in  the  reign  of  an 
"  Amenophis,"  who  was  the  son  of  a  "  Rameses,"  and 
the  father  of  a  "  Sethos."  Each  of  these  two  facts 
belong  to  one  "Amenophis"  only  out  of  the  four  or 
five  in  Manetho's  lists,  and  we  have  thus  a  double 
certainty  that  he  intended  the  monarch  of  the  nine- 
teenth dynasty,  who  was  the  son  and  successor  of 
Rameses  II.,  commonly  called  "  Rameses  the  Great," 
and  was  himself  succeeded  on  the  throne  by  his  son, 
Seti-Menephthah,  or  Seti  II.,  about  B.C.  1300,  or  a 
little  earlier.  There  is  no  other  Egyptian  tradition, 
excepting  one  reported  by  George  the  Syncellus,^ 
which  is  wholly  incompatible  with  the  universally 
allowed  synchronism  of  Joseph  with  Apepi,  and  quite 
unworthy  of  consideration  ;  viz.,  that  the  Exodus  took 
place  under  Amasis  (Aahmes),  the  first  king  of  the 
eighteenth  dynasty,  who  was  probably  contemporary 
with  the  later  years  of  Joseph  himself 

Manetho's  tradition  then,  harmonising,  as  it  does, 
with  the  chronological  considerations  above  adduced, 
which  would  place  the  Exodus  towards  the  end  of  the 
nineteenth  dynasty,  seems  to  deserve  our  acceptance, 
and  indeed  has  been  accepted  by  the  great  bulk  of 
modern  Egyptologists,  as  by  Brugsch,  Birch,  Lenor- 

'  Joseph.,  "  Conti-a  Apion.,"  i.  ^  26. 

2  Ibid.,  ^32. 

*  "  Chronographia,"  p.  62,  B. 


NOTICES  IN  EXODUS.  203 

mant,  Chabas,  and  others.^  Allowing  it,  we  are  able 
to  fix  definitely  on  the  three  Pharaohs  especially- 
concerned  in  the  severe  oppression  of  the  Israelites, 
and  thus  to  give  a  vividness  and  realism  to  our 
conception  of  the  period  of  history  treated  of  in 
Exod.  i.-xiv.  which  add  greatly  to  the  interest  of  the 
narrative. 

If  Menephthah  L,  the  son  and  successor  of  Rameses 
II.,  was  the  Pharaoh  of  the  Exodus,  it  follows  neces- 
sarily that  his  father,  the  great  Rameses,  was  the  king 
of  Exod.  ii.,  from  whom  Moses  fled,  and  after  whose 
death  he  was  directed  to  quit  Midian  and  return  into 
Egypt  for  the  purpose  of  delivering  his  brethren  (ch. 
ii.  23  ;  iv.  19).  But  as  Moses  was  eighty  years  old  at 
this  time  (ch.  vii.  7),  it  is  evident  that  the  Pharaoh 
from  whom  he  fled  cannot  be  the  same  with  the  one 
who,  more  than  eighty  years  previously,  gave  the 
order  for  the  destruction  of  the  Hebrew  male  children 
(ch.  i.  22).  The  narrative  of  Exodus  must  speak  of 
three  Pharaohs,  of  the  first  in  ch.  i.,  of  the  second  in 
ch.  ii.,  and  of  the  third  in  chs.  v.-xiv.  If  the  second 
of  these  is  Rameses  II.,  the  father  of  Menephthah  L, 
the  first  must  be  Seti  I.,  the  father  of  Rameses  II. 

Now,  it  happens  that  Seti  I.  and  Rameses  1 1,  are 
among  the  most  distinguished  of  all  the  Egyptian 
monarchs,  great  warriors,  great  builders,  setters-up  of 


I  See  Brugsch,  "  History  of  Egypt,"  vol.  ii.,  p.  125 ;  Birch,  "  Egypt 
from  the  Earliest  Times,"  p.  133;  Lenoniiant,  "Manuel  d'Histoire 
Ancienne  de  I'Orient,"  vol.  ii.,  p.  292,  edition  of  1882;  Chabas,  "  Re- 
cherches  pour  servir  a  I'histoire  de  la  Xix^e  Dynastie,"  p.  157. 


204  ^AB  YL  ON  AND  EGYPT. 

numerous  inscriptions.  We  know  them  almost  better 
than  any  other  Egyptian  kings,  are  famihar  with  their 
very  countenances,  have  ample  means  of  forming  an 
estimate  of  their  characters  from  their  own  words. 
Seti  I.  may  well  be  the  "  new  king,  which  knew  not 
Joseph."  He  was  the  second  king  of  a  new  dynasty, 
unconnected  with  either  of  the  dynasties  with  which 
Joseph  had  been  contemporary.  He  came  to  the 
throne  at  the  time  when  a  new  danger  to  Egypt  had 
sprung  up  on  the  north-eastern  frontier,  and  when 
consequently  it  was  natural  that  fear  should  be  felt 
by  the  Egyptian  ruler  lest,  "  when  any  war  fell  out, 
the  people  of  Israel  should  join  unto  Egypt's  enemies, 
and  fight  against  the  Egyptians,  and  so  get  them  up 
out  of  the  land"  (ver.  lo).  The  Hittites  had  become 
masters  of  Syria,  and  were  dominant  over  the  whole 
region  from  Mount  Taurus  to  Philistia.  "  Scarcely 
was  Seti  settled  upon  the  throne,  when  he  found 
himself  menaced  on  the  north-east  by  a  formidable 
combination  of  Semitic  with  Turanian  races,  which 
boded  ill  for  the  tranquillity  of  his  kingdom."^  He 
was  occupied  in  a  war  with  them  for  some  years.  At 
its  close  he  engaged  in  the  construction,  or  reparation, 
of  a  great  wall  for  the  defence  of  the  eastern  frontier. 
It  would  be  natural  that,  in  connection  with  this  wall, 
and  as  a  part  of  his  general  system  for  the  protection 
of  the  frontier,  he  should  build  "treasure-cities"  (ver. 
ii),  or  more  properly  "store-cities,"  i.e.,  arsenals  and 
magazines.     That  he  should  name  one  of  these  after 

*  Rawlinson,  "  History  of  Ancient  Egypt,"  vol.  ii.,  p.  287. 


NOTICES  IN  EXODUS.  205 

a  god  whom  he  was  in  the  habit  of  honouring/  and 
the  other  after  his  father,  or  after  his  son,  whom  he 
early  associated,  is  not  surprising.  The  ardour  for 
building  which  characterised  him  would  account  for 
his  employing  the  Israelites  so  largely  "  in  mortar, 
and  in  brick "  (ver.  14),  and  in  the  construction  of 
edifices.  The  severity  of  his  oppression  is  quite  in 
accordance  with  the  cruelty  which  he  exhibited  in 
his  wars,  and  of  which  he  boasts  in  his  inscriptions.^ 

Rameses  II.  was  associated  on  the  throne  by  his 
father  when  he  was  ten  or  eleven  years  of  age.  The 
two  kings  then  reigned  conjointly  for  about  twenty 
years.  Rameses  outlived  his  father  forty-seven  years, 
and  probably  had  the  real  direction  of  the  government 
for  about  sixty  years.  There  is  no  other  reign  in  the 
New  Empire  which  reaches  nearly  to  the  length  of 
his.  He  was  less  of  a  warrior  than  his  father,  and 
more  of  a  builder.  Among  his  principal  works  was 
the  completion  of  the  city  of  Rameses  (Pi-Ramesu), 
begun  by  his  father,  and  made  by  Rameses  the  resi- 
dence of  the  court,  and  one  of  the  chief  cities  of  the 
empire.  He  appears  also  to  have  completed  Pithom 
(Pi-Tum),  and  to  have  entirely  built  many  other 
important  towns.  All  his  works  were  raised  by 
means  of  forced  labour ;  and  for  the  purpose  of  their 
construction  he  required  an  enormous  mass  of  human 
material,  which  had  to  be  constantly  employed  under 
taskmasters  in  the  most  severe  and  exhausting  toil, 

^  Birch,  "  Egypt  from  the  Earliest  Times,"  p.  119. 
2"  History  of  Ancient  Egypt,"  vol,  ii.,  pp.  288-291. 


2o6  BAB  YL ON  AND  EG  YPT. 

under  a  burning  sun,  and  with  few  sanitary  precau- 
tions. M.  Lenormant  says  of  him  and  his  "  great 
works''^: — "  Ce  n'est  qu'avec  un  veritable  sentiment 
d'horreur  que  Ton  pent  songer  aux  milliers  de  captifs 
qui  durent  mourir  sous  le  baton  des  gardes-chiourmes, 
ou  bien  victimes  des  fatigues  excessives  et  des  priva- 
tions de  toute  nature,  en  elevant  en  qualite  de  for9ats 
les  gigantesques  constructions  auxquelles  se  plaisait 
I'insatiable  orgueil  du  monarque  egyptien.  Dans  les 
monuments  du  regne  de  Ramses  il  n'y  a  pas  une 
pierre,  pour  ainsi  dire,  qui  n'ait  coiate  une  vie 
humaine."  Such  was  the  character  of  the  monarch 
under  whom  the  Israelites  are  said  to  have  "  sighed 
by  reason  of  their  bondage,"  and  to  have  "  cried " 
so  that  "  their  cry  came  up  to  God  by  reason  of  their 
bondage;  and  God  heard  their  groaning,  and  God 
remembered  His  covenant  with  Abraham,  with  Isaac, 
and  with  Jacob  ;  and  God  looked  upon  the  children 
of  Israel,  and  God  had  respect  unto  them  "  (Exod.  ii. 

23-25)- 

Besides  his  suitability  in  character  to  be  the  Pharaoh 
who  continued  the  severe  oppression  begun  by  Seti  I., 
Rameses  IL,  by  the  great  length  of  his  reign,  exactly 
fits  into  the  requirements  of  the  Biblical  narrative. 
That  narrative  requires  for  its  second  Pharaoh  a  king 
Avho  reigned  at  least  forty  years,  probably  longer. 
The  New  Empire  furnishes  only  three  reigns  of  the 
necessary  duration, — those  of  Thothmes  III.  (fifty-four 
years),  Rameses  IL  (sixty-seven  years),  and  Psamme- 

1"  Manuel  d'Histoire  Ancienne,"  vol.  i.  423. 


NO  TICES  IN  EXOD  US.  207 


tichus  I.  (fifty-four  years).  Psammetichus,  who  reigned 
from  B.C.  66j  to  613,  is  greatly  too  late;  Thothmes 
III.  is  very  much  too  early ;  Rameses  11.  alone  verges 
upon  the  time  at  which  the  severe  oppression  must 
necessarily  be  placed.  It  can  scarcely  be  a  coinci- 
dence that  Egyptian  tradition  should  point  out  Men- 
ephthah  I.  as  the  Pharaoh  of  the  Exodus,  and  that, 
the  Biblical  narrative  assigning  to  his  predecessor  an 
exceptionally  long  reign,  the  monuments  and  Manetho 
should  agree  in  giving  to  that  predecessor  the  excep- 
tionally long  reign  of  sixty-six  or  sixty-seven  years. 


CHAPTER    XVI. 

FURTHER    NOTICES    OF    EGYPT    IN    EXODUS. 

The  portraits  of  the  first  and  second  Pharaohs  men- 
tioned in  the  Book  of  Exodus  are  only  faintly  and 
slightly  sketched.  That  of  the  third  monarch — "  the 
Pharaoh  of  the  Exodus,"  as  he  is  commonly  termed 
— is,  on  the  contrary,  presented  to  us  with  much  clear- 
ness and  distinctness,  though  without  effort  or  con- 
scious elaboration.  He  is  an  oppressor  as  merciless 
as  either  of  his  predecessors,  as  deaf  to  pity,  as  deter- 
mined to  crush  the  aspirations  of  the  Hebrews  by  hard 
labour.  To  him  belongs  the  ingenious  device  for 
aggravating  suffering,  which  has  passed  into  the  pro- 
verbial phraseology  of  modern  Europe,  the  require- 
ment of ''bricks  without  straw"  (ch.  v.  7-19).  He 
disregards  the  afflictions  of  his  own  countrymen  as 
completely  as  those  of  his  foreign  slaves,  and  continues 
fixed  in  his  determination  not  to  "  let  Israel  go,"  until 
he  suffers  the  loss  of  his  own  first-born  (ch.  xii.  29- 
32).  When  finally  he  has  been  induced  to  allow  the 
Hebrews  to  withdraw  themselves  from  his  land,  he 
suddenly  repents  of  his  concession,  pursues  after  them, 

and  seeks,  not  so  much  to  prevent  their  escape,  as  to 
208 


NOTICES  IN  EXODUS.  209 

destroy  them  to  the  last  man  (ch.  xv.  9).  To  this 
harshness  and  cruelty  of  temper  he  adds  a  remarkable 
weakness  and  vacillation — he  will  and  he  will  not ;  he 
makes  promises  and  retracts  them ;  he  "  thrusts  the 
Israelites  out"  (ch.  xi.  i;  xii.  31),  and  then  rushes 
after  them  at  the  head  of  all  the  troops  that  he  can 
muster  (ch.  xiv.  5-9).  Further — and  this  is  most 
remarkable — unlike  the  generality  of  Egyptian  mon- 
archs,  he  seems  to  be  deficient  in  personal  courage ; 
at  any  rate,  there  is  no  appearance  of  his  having 
imperilled  himself  in  the  attack  made  on  the  Israelites 
at  the  Red  Sea, — "  the  Egyptians  pursued,  and  went 
in  after  them  to  the  midst  of  the  sea,  even  all  Pharaoh's 
horses,  his  chariots,  and  his  horsemen"  (ch.  xiv.  23); 
but  not,  so  far  as  appears,  Pharaoh  himself  This, 
indeed,  has  been  disputed,  and  Ps.  cxxxvi.  15  has  been 
quoted  as  a  positive  proof  to  the  contrary ;  ^  but  the 
expression  of  a  poet  who  wrote  some  centuries  after 
the  event  would  be  very  weak  evidence  with  respect 
to  the  fact,  besides  which  his  statement  is,  not  that  the 
Pharaoh  was  killed,  but  that  he  was  "  overthrown." 
Neither  the  narrative  in  Exod.  xiv.  nor  the  song  of 
rejoicing  in  the  following  chapter  contains  the  slightest 
allusion  to  the  Pharaoh's  death,  an  omission  almost 
inconceivable  if  he  really  perished  with  his  warriors.^ 
Further,  the  Pharaoh  of  the  Exodus  seems  to  have 

1  Canon  Cook  in  the  "Speaker's  Commentary,"  vol.  i.,  p.  309. 

2  That  the  Pharaoh  did  not  perish  is  maintained  by  Wilkinson 
("  Ancient  Egyptians,"  vol.  i.,  p.  54),  Chabas  ("  Recherches  pour  servir 
a  I'histoire  de  I'Egypte,"  pp.  152,  l6i),  Lenormant  ("Manuel  d'Histoire 
Ancienne,"  vol.  ii.,  p.  292,  edition  of  1883),  and  others. 

14 


2IO  BAB  YL  ON  AND  E  G  YPT. 

been  grossly  and  abnormally  superstitious,  one  who 
put  real  trust  in  magicians  and  sorcerers,  and  turned 
to  them  in  times  of  difficulty  rather  than  to  statesmen 
and  persons  of  experience  in  affairs. 

What,  then,  does  profane  history  tell  us  of  the 
Menephthah  whom  we  have  shown  to  be  at  once  the 
traditional  "  Pharaoh  of  the  Exodus "  and  the  king 
pointed  out  by  chronological  considerations  as  the 
ruler  of  Egypt  at  the  period  ?  M.  Lenormant  begins 
his  account  of  him  by  observing,^  "  Moreover,  he  was 
neither  a  soldier  nor  an  administrator,  but  one  whose 
mind  was  turned  almost  exclusively  towards  the 
chimeras  of  sorcery  and  magic,  resembling  in  this 
respect  his  brother,  Kha-m-uas."  ''  The  Book  of 
Exodus,"  he  adds,  "  is  in  the  most  exact  agreement 
with  historical  truth  when  it  depicts  him  as  sur- 
rounded by  priest-magicians,  with  whom  Moses 
contends  in  working  prodigies,  in  order  to  affect  the 
mind  of  the  Pharaoh."^ 

Later  on  in  his  history  of  Menephthah,  M.  Lenor- 
mant has  the  following  passage.^  He  is  describing 
the  great  invasion  of  Libyans  and  others  which 
Menephthah  repulsed  in  his  fifth  year.  "  The  bar- 
barians advanced  without  meeting  any  serious  resist- 
ance. The  terrified  population  either  fled  before  them, 
or  made  its  submission,  but  attempted  nothing  like  a 
struggle.      Already  had   the  invading   army  reached 

1"  Manuel  d'Histoire  Ancienne,"  vol.  ii.,  p.  281  (edition  of  1883). 

2  Ibid. 

3  Ibid.,  p.  289.     Compare  "  Records  of  the  Past,"  vol.  iv.,  pp.  41-44' 


NO  TICES  IN  EXOD  US.  2 1 1 

the  neighbourhood  of  Pa-ari-sheps,  the  Prosopis  of 
the  Greeks ;  On  (HeliopoHs)  and  Man-nofri  (Memphis) 
were  seriously  threatened.  Menephthah  assembled 
his  army  in  front  of  these  two  towns,  in  order  to  cover 
them;  he  drew  from  Asia  a  number  of  mercenaries, 
to  supply  the  lack  of  Egyptian  soldiers  of  sufficient 
experience ;  at  the  same  time  he  fortified  the  banks  of 
the  middle  branch  of  the  Nile,  to  prevent  the  enemy 
from  crossing  it,  and  to  place  in  safety,  at  any  rate, 
the  eastern  half  of  the  Delta.  Sending  forward  in 
advance,  first  of  all,  his  chariot-force  and  his  light- 
armed  auxiliaries,  the  Pharaoh  promised  to  join  the 
battle  array  with  the  bulk  of  his  troops  at  the  end  of 
fourteen  days.  But  he  zvas  not  personally  fond  of 
actual  fight,  and  disliked  exposing  himself  to  the  chance 
of  defeat.  An  apparition  of  the  god  Phthah,  which 
he  saw  in  a  dream,  warned  him  that  his  lofty  rank 
required  him  not  to  cross  the  river.  He  therefore  sent 
his  army  to  the  combat  under  the  command  of  some 
of  his  father's  generals,  who  were  still  living."  Two 
features  of  Menephthah's  character,  as  represented  in 
Scripture,  are  here  illustrated :  his  want  of  personal 
courage  and  his  habit  of  departing  from  his  promises 
with  or  without  a  pretext.  The  apparition  of  the 
god  Phthah  in  a  dream  is  clearly  a  convenient  fiction, 
by  means  of  which  he  might  at  once  conceal  his 
cowardice  and  excuse  the  forfeiture  of  his  word. 

The  Egyptian  monuments  thus  confirm  three 
leading  features  in  the  character  of  Menephthah, — his 
superstitiousness,  his  want  of  courage,  and  his  weak, 


212  BAB  YL  ON  AND  E G  YFT. 

shifty,  false  temper.  They  do  not,  however,  furnish 
much  indication  of  his  cruelty.  This  is,  perhaps, 
sufficiently  accounted  for  by  their  scantiness.  Men- 
ephthah  is  a  king  of  whom  it  has  been  said  ^  that  he 
"belongs  to  the  number  of  those  monarchs  whose 
memory  has  been  with  difficulty  preserved  by  a  few 
monuments  of  inferior  value,  and  a  few  inscriptions  of 
but  little  importance."  We  have,  in  fact,  but  one 
inscription  of  any  considerable  length  belonging  to 
his  reign.^  It  gives  mainly  an  account  of  the  Libyan 
war,  in  which  he  was  not  personally  engaged.  A  tone 
of  pride  and  arrogance  common  to  the  autobiographi- 
cal memoirs  of  Egyptian  kings  pervades  it,  but  it 
contains  few  notices  of  any  severities  for  which  the 
monarch  himself  can  be  regarded  as  responsible. 
That  he  made  slaves  of  the  prisoners  taken  in  the 
Libyan  war^  merely  shows  that  he  acted  like  other 
monarchs  of  the  time.  He  speaks,  however,  of 
having  in  a  Cushite  war  "  slaughtered  the  people,  and 
set  fire  to  them,  and  netted,  as  men  net  birds,  the 
entire  country."*  This  last  expression  reminds  one 
of  a  cruel  Persian  practice,  whereby  whole  popu- 
lations were  exterminated,  or  reduced  to  slavery;^  the 
preceding  one,  if  it  is  to  be  taken  literally,  implies  a 
still  more  extreme  and  more  unusual  barbarity. 

*  Brugsch,  "  Histoire  d'Egypte,"  p.  175. 

2  This  inscription  will  be  found  translated  in  "  Records  of  the  Past," 
vol.  iv.,  pp.  39-48,  and  in  M.  Chabas'  **  Recherches  pour  servir  a 
I'histoire  de  I'Egypte,"  pp.  84-94. 

3 "  Records  of  the  Past,"  vol.  iv,,  p.  47,  1.  63. 

*  Ibid.,  1.  67.  o  Herod,  iii.  149;  vi.  31. 


NO  TICES  IN  EX  on  US.  2 1 3 

It  was  not  to  be  expected  that  the  general  series  of 
events  related  in  the  first  fourteen  chapters  of  Exodus 
should  obtain  any  direct  mention  in  the  historical 
records  of  Egypt.  As  M.  Chabas  remarks/  '*  events 
of  this  kind  were  not  entitled  to  be  inscribed  on  the 
public  monuments,  where  nothing  was  ever  registered 
except  successes  and  triumphs."  The  court  historio- 
graphers would  naturally  refrain  from  all  mention  of 
the  terrible  plagues  from  which  Egypt  suffered  during 
a  whole  year,  as  well  as  from  any  record  of  the  disaster 
of  the  Red  Sea  ;  and  the  monarch  would  certainly  not 
inscribe  any  account  of  them  upon  his  edifices.  Still 
there  are  points  of  the  narrative  which  admit  of  com- 
parison with  the  records  of  the  time,  and  in  which  an 
agreement  or  disagreement  with  those  records  would 
almost  of  necessity  show  itself;  and  these  it  is  pro- 
posed to  consider  in  the  remainder  of  this  chapter. 
Such  are  (i)  the  employment  of  forced  labour  in 
Egypt  at  this  period  of  its  history,  and  the  method  of 
its  employment ;  (2)  the  inclusion,  or  non-inclusion, 
of  the  Hebrews  among  the  forced  labourers ;  (3)  the 
construction  at  the  period  of  "  store-cities,"  and  the 
names  of  the  cities  ;  (4)  the  military  organization  of 
the  time ;  (5)  the  untimely  loss  of  a  son  by  the  king 
under  whom  the  Exodus  took  place ;  and  (6)  the 
existence  or  non-existence  of  any  indication  in  the 
records  of  such  exhaustion  and  weakness  as  might  be 
expected  to  follow  the  events  related  in  Exodus. 

The  use  of  forced  labour  by  the  Egyptian  monarchs 

^  "  Recherches,"  etc.,  p.  152. 


214 


BA  B  YL  ON  A  ND  EGYPT. 


of  the  time,  especially  by  Seti  I.  and  Rameses  II.,  is 
abundantly  witnessed  to  by  the  monuments.  The 
kings  speak  of  it  as  a  matter  of  course ;  the  poets 
deplore  it;  the  artists  represent  it.  "It was  the  custom 
of  the  Egyptians  to  subject  prisoners  of  war  to  this 
Hfe  of  forced  labour.  A  tomb  of  the  time  of  Thothmes 
III.  has  furnished  pictures  which  represent  Asiatic 
captives  making  bricks,  and  working  at  buildings  under 
the  rod  of  task-masters — pictures  which  are  a  figured 
commentary  on  the  verses  of  Exodus  (ch.  i.  11-14) 
which  we  have  just  cited.  But  under  Rameses  II.  the 
unprecedented  development  of  architectural  works 
rendered  the  fatigues  to  which  such  wretches  were 
exposed  far  more  overwhelming."  ^  Gangs  of  labourers 
were  placed  under  the  charge  of  an  overseer  armed  with 
a  stick,  which  he  applied  freely  to  their  naked  backs 
and  shoulders  on  the  slightest  provocation.  A  certain 
definite  amount  of  task-work  was  required  every  day 
of  each  labourer.  Some  worked  at  brick-making, 
some  at  stone-cutting,  some  at  dragging  blocks  from 
the  quarries,  some  at  erecting  edifices.  Food  was 
provided  by  the  Government,  and  appears  not  to  have 
been  insufficient ;  but  the  hard  work,  and  the  exposure 
to  the  burning  sun  of  Egypt,  were  exhausting  in  the 
extreme,  and  rendered  their  life  a  burden  to  those 
condemned  to  pass  it  in  this  sort  of  employ. 

Whether  the  monuments  indicate,  or  do  not  indi- 
cate, the  inclusion  of  the  Hebrews  among  the  forced 

^  Lenormant,  "Manuel  d'Histoire  Ancienne,"  vol.  ii.,  p.  269,  edition 
of  1883. 


NO  TICES  IN  EXOD  US.  2 1 5 


labourers  of  this  period  depends  on  our  acceptance  or 
non-acceptance  of  a  suggested  identification.^  Are 
we,  or  are  we  not,  to  regard  the  Hebrews  as  the  same 
people  with  the  Aperu  or  Apuriu  ?  In  favour  of  the 
identification,  there  is,  in  the  first  place,  the  close 
resemblance  of  the  words.  M.  Chabas,  indeed,  over- 
states the  case  when  he  says^  that  the  Egyptian 
Aperu  is  ''the  exact  transcription  of  the  Hebrew  n^j;." 
It  is  not  so  really,  since  the  exact  transcription  would 
be  "  Aberu  " ;  but  it  is  a  very  near  approach  to  an 
exact  transcription.  It  falls  short  of  exactness  merely 
by  the  substitution  of  a  /  for  a  b,  the  two  letters  being 
closely  cognate,  and  the  ear  of  the  Egyptians  for 
foreign  sounds  not  very  accurate.  In  the  next  place, 
it  is  found  that  Rameses  II.  employs  the  Aperu  in  the 
building  of  his  city  of  Rameses  (Pa-Ramesu),  which 
is  exactly  one  of  the  works  ascribed  to  the  Hebrews 
in  Exodus  (ch.  i.  11).  Further,  we  must  either  accept 
the  identity  of  the  Hebrews  with  the  Aperu,  or  we  must 
suppose  that  the  kings  of  this  period  had  in  their 
service  at  this  time  two  sets  of  forced  labourers  quite 
unconnected,  yet  with  names  almost  exactly  alike. 
Against  the  identification,  almost  the  sole  point  that 
can  be  urged,  is  the  fact  that  Aperu  are  found  still  to 
be  employed  by  the  Egyptian  kings  after  the  Exodus 
is  a  thing  of  the  past,  as  by  Rameses  III.  and  Rameses 

^  On  this  identification,  see  Chabas,  "  Recherches  pour  servir  i  I'his- 
toire  de  lEgypte,"  pp.  142-150-,  "Melanges  Eg>^ptologiques,"  2™^ 
Serie,  p.  108,  et  seq. 

2  "  Recherches,"  p.  142. 


2i6  BAB  YL ON  AND  EG  YPT. 

IV.  But  this  objection  seems  to  be  sufficiently  met 
by  M.  Chabas.  "  It  is  quite  certain  that,  spread  as  the 
text  of  Scripture  declares  that  they  were  over  the 
whole  of  Egypt,  the  Hebrews  could  not  by  any  possi- 
bility respond  universally  to  the  appeal  of  Moses  ; 
perhaps  some  of  them  did  not  even  wish  to  do  so. 
Such  was  doubtless  the  case  with  those  [Aperu]  whom 
we  find  enrolled  in  regiments  in  the  reigns  of  Rameses 
III.  and  Rameses  IV."  ^ 

The  construction  of  "  store-cities  "  at  the  required 
period  has  received  recent  illustration  of  the  most 
remarkable  kind.  The  explorers  employed  by  the 
"  Egypt  Exploration  Fund  "  have  uncovered  at  Tel-el- 
Maskoutah,  near  Tel-el-Kebir,  an  ancient  city,  which 
the  inscriptions  found  on  the  spot  show  to  have  been 
built,  in  part  at  any  rate,  by  Rameses  II.,  and  which  is 
of  so  peculiar  a  construction  as  to  suggest  at  once  to 
those  engaged  in  the  work  the  idea  that  it  was  built 
for  a  "  store-city."  ^  The  town  is  altogether  a  square, 
enclosed  by  a  brick  wall  twenty-two  feet  thick,  and 
measuring  six  hundred  and  fifty  feet  along  each  side. 
The  area  contained  within  the  wall  is  estimated  at 
about  ten  acres.  Nearly  the  whole  of  this  space  is 
occupied  by  solidly  built  square  chambers,  divided 
one  from  the  other  by  brick  walls  from  eight  to  ten 
feet  thick,  which  are  unpierced  by  window  or  door,  or 

'  "  Recherches,"  p.  163. 
•    ''■  See  an  article  in  the  British  Quarterly  Revini)  for  July,  1883,  pp. 
IIO-I15  ;  and  compare  the  letters  on  the  same  subject  in  the  Academy 
for  February  24th,  March  3d  and   17th,  and  April   7th  of  the  same 
year. 


NO  TICES  IN  EXOD  US.  217 

opening  of  any  kind.  About  ten  feet  from  the  bottom 
the  walls  show  a  row  of  recesses  for  beams,  in  some 
of  which  decayed  wood  still  remains,  indicating  that 
the  buildings  were  two-storied,  having  a  lower  room, 
which  could  only  be  entered  by  means  of  a  trap-door, 
used  probably  as  a  storehouse  or  magazine,  and  an 
upper  one,  in  which  the  keeper  of  the  store  may  have 
had  his  abode.  Thus  far  the  discovery  is  simply  that 
of  a  "  store-city,"  built  partly  by  Rameses  II. ;  but  it 
further  appears,  from  several  short  inscriptions,  that 
the  name  of  the  city  was  Pa-Tum,  or  Pithom;  and 
there  is  thus  no  reasonable  doubt  that  one  of  the  two 
cities  built  by  the  Israelites  has  been  laid  bare,  and 
answers  completely  to  the  description  given  of  it. 
Of  the  twin  city,  Rameses,  the  remains  have  not  yet 
been  identified.  We  know,  however,  from  the  inscrip- 
tions, that  it  was  in  the  immediate  vicinity  of  Tanis, 
and  that  it  was  built  perhaps  in  part  by  Seti  I.,  but 
mainly  by  his  son  Rameses  II. 

It  lends  additional  interest  to  the  discovery  of 
Pithom  that  the  city  is  found  to  be  built  almost 
entirely  of  brick.  It  was  in  brick-making  that  the 
Israelites  are  said  in  the  Book  of  Exodus  (ch.  i.  14; 
V.  7-19)  to  have  been  principally  employed.  They  are 
also  said  to  have  been  occupied  to  some  extent  "  in 
mortar"  (ch.  i.  14);  and  the  bricks  of  the  store- 
chambers  of  Pithom  are  "  laid  with  mortar  in  regular 
tiers."  ^  They  made  their  bricks  "  with  straw  "  until 
no  straw  was  given  them,  when  they  were  reduced  to 

1  British  Qitarterly  Review,  July  1883,  p.  no. 


2 1 8  BAB YL ON  AND  EGYPT. 

straits  (ch.  v.  7-19)-  It  is  in  accordance  with  this 
part  of  the  narrative,  and  sheds  some  additional  Hght 
upon  it,  to  find  that  the  bricks  of  the  Pithom 
chambers,  while  generally  containing  a  certain  amount 
of  straw,  are  in  some  instances  destitute  of  it.  The 
king's  cruelty  forced  the  Israelites  to  produce  in  some 
cases  an  inferior  article. 

The  military  organization  of  the  Egyptians  at  the 
time  of  the  Exodus  is  represented  as  very  complete. 
The  king  is  able,  almost  at  a  moment's  warning,  to 
take  the  field  with  a  force  of  six  hundred  picked 
chariots,  and  numerous  others  of  a  more  ordinary 
description,  together  with  a  considerable  body  of  foot- 
men. It  does  not  appear  that  he  has  any  cavalry,  for 
the  word  translated  *'  horsemen "  in  our  version 
probably  designates  the  riders  in  the  chariots.  Each 
squadron  of  thirty  chariots  is  apparently  under  the 
command  of  a  **  captain  "  (eh.  xiv.  7).  The  entire 
force,  large  as  it  is,  is  ready  to  take  the  field  in  a 
few  days,  for  otherwise  the  Israelites  would  have 
got  beyond  the  Egyptian  border  before  the  Pharaoh 
could  have  overtaken  them.  It  acts  promptly  and 
bravely,  and  only  suffers  disaster  through  circum- 
stances of  an  abnormal  and  indeed  miraculous 
character.  Now,  it  appears  by  the  Egyptian  monu- 
ments that  the  military  system  was  brought  to  its 
highest  perfection  by  Seti  I.  and  Rameses  II.  It  is 
certain  that,  in  their  time,  the  army  was  most  carefully 
organized,  divided  into  brigades,^  and  maintained  in  a 
^  "  Records  of  the  Post,"  vol,  ii.,  p.  68. 


NO  TICES  IN  EXOD  US.  219 


State  of  constant  preparation.  The  chariot  force  was 
regarded  as  of  very  much  the  highest  importance,  and 
amounted,  according  to  the  lowest  computation,  to 
several  thousands.  It  is  doubtful  whether  any  cavalry 
was  employed,  none  appearing  on  the  monuments, 
and  the  word  so  translated  by  many  writers^  being 
regarded  by  others  as  the  proper  designation  of  the 
troops  who  fought  in  chariots.^  Infantry,  however,  in 
large  well-disciplined  bodies,  always  attended  and 
supported  the  chariot  force.  Under  Menephthah  the 
system  of  his  father  and  grandfather  was  still  main- 
tained, though  no  longer  in  full  vigour.  He  required 
a  fortnight  to  collect  sufficient  troops  to  meet  the 
Libyan  invasion.^  He  had  then,  however,  to  meet  an 
army  of  trained  soldiers,  and  had  no  need  to  hasten, 
since  he  occupied  a  strong  position.  Under  the 
circumstances  of  the  Exodus,  it  was  necessary  to  be 
more  prompt,  and  sufficient  to  collect  a  much  smaller 
arrny.  This  he  appears  to  have  been  able  to  do  at 
the  end  of  a  few  days. 

It  was  scarcely  to  be  expected  that  the  Egyptian 
records  would  present  any  evidence  on  the  subject  of 
Menephthah's  loss  of  a  son  by  an  untimely  death. 
Curiously,  however,  it  does  happen  that  a  monument, 

1  As  generally  in  the  "  Records  of  the  Past,"  and  by  M.  Chabas  in 
his  "  Recherches  pour  servdr,"  etc.,  pp.  85,  88,  89,  etc. 

2M.  Lenormant  almost  always  replaces  the  "cavalry"  of  other  trans- 
lators by  the  expression  '' des  chars''  ("Manuel  d'llistoire  Ancienne," 
vol.  ii./pp.  255,  256,  etc.).  He  observes  in  one  place,  "The  military 
education  of  the  Egyptians  did  not  include  teaching  men  to  ride,  since 
they  fought  in  chariots." 

3  "  Records  of  the  Past,"  vol.  iv.,  p.  43. 


220  BAB  YL  ON  AND  E  G  YPT. 

at  present  in  the  Berlin  Museum,  contains  a  proof  of 
his  having  suffered  such  a  loss.^  There  is  no  descrip- 
tion of  the  circumstances,  but  a  mere  indication  of  the 
bare  fact.  The  confirmation  thus  lent  to  the  Scriptural 
narrative  is  slight ;  but  it  has  a  value  in  a  case  where 
the  entire  force  of  the  evidence  consists  in  its  being 
cumulative. 

Three  results  would  naturally  follow  on  the  occur- 
rence of  such  circumstances  as  those  recorded  in 
Exodus.  Egypt  would  be  for  a  time  weakened  in  a 
military  point  of  view,  and  her  glory,  as  a  conquering 
power,  would  suffer  temporary  eclipse.  The  royal 
authority  would  be  shaken,  and  encouragement 
afforded  to  the  pretensions  of  any  rival  claimants 
of  the  throne.  The  loss  of  six  hundred  thousand 
labourers  would  bring  to  an  end  the  period  of  the 
construction  of  great  works,  or,  at  the  least,  greatly 
check  their  rapid  multiplication.  Now  this  is  exactly 
what  all  historians  of  Egypt  agree  to  have  been  the 
general  condition  of  things  in  Egypt  in  the  later  years 
of  Menephthah  and  the  period  immediately  following. 
Military  expeditions  cease  until  the  time  of  Rameses 
III.,  a  space  of  nearly  forty  years.  The  later  years  of 
Menephthah  are  disturbed  by  the  rise  of  a  pretender, 
Ammon-mes,  who  disputes  the  throne  with  his  son, 
and,  according  to  Manetho,^  occupies  it  for  five  years. 
Seti  II.,  or  Seti-Menephthah,  has  then  a  short  reign  ; 
but  another  claimant   is  brought   forward  by  a  high 

*  Brugsch,  "  Histoire  d'Egypte,"  p.  175. 
^  Ap.  Syncell.,  "  Chronographia,"  p.  72,  C. 


NO  TICES  IN  EXOD  US.  221 

official,  and  established  in  his  place.  Soon  afterwards 
complete  anarchy  sets  in,  and  continues  for  several 
years,^  till  a  certain  Set-nekht  is  made  king  by  the 
priests,  and  tranquillity  once  more  restored.  The 
construction  of  monuments  during  this  period  almost 
entirely  ceases ;  and  when  Rameses  III.  shows  the 
desire  to  emulate  the  architectural  glories  of  former 
kings,  he  is  compelled  to  work  on  a  much  smaller 
scale,  and  to  content  himself  with  the  erection  of  a 
comparatively  few  edifices.  * 

1  See  the  "  Great  Harris  Papyrus,"  translated  by  Dr.  Eisenlohr  in 
the  "Transactions  of  the  Society  of  Biblical  Archaeology,"  vol.  i.,  p. 
359,  et  scq. 


CHAPTER   XVII. 

NOTICES    OF    EGYPT    IN    EXODUS    AND    NUMBERS. 

"  The  children  of  Israel  journeyed  from  Rameses  to  Succoth." — 
ExOD.  xii.  37. 

"  It  came  to  pass,  when  Pharaoh  ha,d  let  the  people  go,  that  God  led 
them  not  [through]  the  way  of  the  land  of  the  Philistines,  although 
that  was  near  .  .  .  But  God  led  the  people  about  [through]  the  way 
of  the  wilderness  of  the  Red  Sea  .  .  .  And  they  took  their  journey 
from  Succoth,  and  encamped  in  Etham,  in  the  edge  of  the  wilderness," 
— ExOD.  xiii.  17-20. 

"  Speak  unto  the  children  of  Israel,  that  they  turn  and  encamp  before 
Pi-hahiroth,  between  Migdol  and  the  sea,  over  against  Baal-Zephou ; 
before  it  shall  ye  encamp  by  the  sea."-^ExOD.  xiv.  2. 

"  These  are  the  journeys  of  the  children  of  Israel,  which  went  forth 
out  of  the  land  of  Egypt  with  their  amiies  under  the  hand  of  Moses 
and  Aaron.  And  Moses  wrote  their  goings  out  according  to  their 
journeys  by  the  commandment  of  the  Lord  :  and  these  are  their  journeys 
according  to  their  goings  out.  And  they  departed  from  Rameses  in  the 
first  month,  on  the  fifteenth  day  of  the  first  month  .  .  .  And  the 
children  of  Israel  removed  from  Rameses,  and  pitched  in  Succoth. 
And  they  departed  from  Succoth,  and  pitched  in  Etham,  which  is  in 
the  edge  of  the  wilderness.  And  they  removed  from  Etham,  and 
turned  again  unto  Pi-hahiroth,  which  is  before  Baal-Zephon :  and  they 
pitched  before  Migdol.  And  they  departed  from  before  Pi-hahiroth, 
.and  passed  through  the  midst  of  the  sea  into  the  wilderness,  and  went 
three  days'  journey  in  the  wilderness  of  Etham,  and  pitched  in  Marah. 
And  they  removed  from  Marah,  and  came  unto  Elim  .  .  .  And  they  re- 
moved from  Elim,  and  encamped  by  the  Red  Sea." — Numb,  xxxiii.  i-io. 
222 


NOTICES  IN  EXODUS  AND  NUMBERS.  223 

Although  the  geographical  problems  connected  with 
the  Exodus  of  the  Israelites  from  Egypt  cannot  be 
said  to  be  as  yet  completely  solved,  yet  the  course 
of  modern  research  has  shed  considerable  light  upon 
the  route  followed  by  the  flying  people,  and  the  posi- 
tion of  their  various  resting-places.  The  results 
arrived  at  may  be  regarded  as  tolerably  assured,  since 
they  have  not  been  reached  without  very  searching 
criticism  and  the  suggestion  of  many  rival  hypotheses. 
The  boldest  of  these,  started  in  the  year  1874  by  one 
of  the  first  of  modern  Egyptologists,  Dr.  Brugsch,^ 
for  a  time  shook  to  its  foundation  the  fabric  of  earlier 
belief.  The  authority  of  its  propounder  was  great,  his 
acquaintance  with  the  ancient  geography  of  Egypt 
unrivalled,  and  his  argument  conducted  with  extreme 
skill  and  ingenuity  ;  it  was  not  to  be  wondered  at, 
therefore,  that  his  views  obtained  for  a  time  very 
general  credence.  But  researches  conducted  subse- 
quently to  the  enunciation  of  his  views,  partly  with 
the  object  of  testing  them,  partly  without  any  such 
object,  have  shown  his  theory  to  be  untenable^;  and 
opinion  has  recently  reverted  to  the  old  channel, 
having  gained  by  the  discussion  some  additional 
precision  and  definiteness.     We  propose  in  the  present 

^  The  views  of  Dr.  Brugsch  were  first  propounded  at  the  Interna- 
tional Congress  of  Orientalists,  held  in  1874.  They  were  afterwards 
published  in  the  English  translation  of  his  "  History  of  Egypt,"  London, 
1879. 

2  See  Mr.  Greville  Chester's  papers  in  the  "  Quarterly  Statements  " 
of  the  Palestine  Exploration  Fund,  July,  1880,  and  April,  1881 ;  and 
Mr.  Stanley  Poole's  paper  in  the  British  Quarterly  Review  for  July, 
1883. 


224  BAB YL ON  AND  EGYPT. 

chapter  to  consider  the  Exodus  geographically,  and 
to  trace,  as  distinctly  as  possible,  the  "journeys"  of 
the  Israelites  from  their  start  on  the  day  following  the 
destruction  of  the  first-born  to  their  entrance  on  the 
"  wilderness  of  Etham  "  after  their  passage  of  the  Red 
Sea. 

The  point  of  departure  Is  clearly  stated  both  in 
Exodus  (ch.  xii.  37),  and  in  Numbers  (ch.  xxxiii.  3,  5) 
to  have  been  "  Rameses.".  What  does  this  mean  ? 
We  hear  in  Scripture  both  of  a  "  land  of  Rameses  " 
(Gen.  xlvii.  1 1),  and  of  a  city  "  Raamses,"  or  Rameses. 
It  is  not  disputed  that  these  two  words  are  the  same ; 
nor  does  it  seem  to  be  seriously  doubted  that  the  land 
received  its  name  from  the  town.  From  which,  then, 
are  we  to  understand  that  the  Israelites  made  their 
start?  It  has  been  argued  strongly  that  "  the  land" 
is  intended;^  and  with  this  contention  we  are  so  far 
agreed,  that  we  should  not  suppose  any  general  gather- 
ing of  the  people  to  the  city  of  Rameses,  but  a  move- 
ment from  all  parts  of  the  land  of  Rameses  or  Goshen 
to  the  general  muster  at  Succoth.  Succoth  seems  to 
us  to  have  been  the  first  rendezvous.  But  a  portion 
of  the  Israelites,  and  that  the  leading  and  guiding 
portion,  started  probably  from  the  town.  Menephthah 
resided  at  Pa-Ramesu,  a  suburb  of  Tanis.  Moses  and 
Aaron  held  communication  with  him  during  the  night, 
after  the  first-born  were  slain.  They  must,  therefore, 
have  been  in  the  town  or  in  its  immediate  neighbour- 
hood.    They  received  permission  to  depart  (Exod.  xii. 

iSee  Dr.  Trumbull's  "  Kadesh-Barnea"  (New  York,  1884),  p.  382. 


NOTICES  IN  EXODUS  AND  NUMBERS.  225 

31),  and,  as  soon  as  morning  broke,  they  set  off 
with  the  other  IsraeUtes  of  the  neighbourhood.  It  is 
this  start  from  the  town  of  Ram*eses  which  the  histo- 
rian has  in  his  eye  ;  he  needs  a  definite  terminus  a  quo, 
from  which  to  begin  his  account  of  the  journeying 
(Numb,  xxxiii.  5),  and  he  finds  it  in  this  city,  the  seat 
of  the  court  at  the  time.  Rameses  was  in  lat.  31°, 
long.  32°,  nearly,  towards  the  north-eastern  corner  of 
Egypt,  about  thirty  miles  almost  due  west  of  Pelu- 
sium,  from  which,  however,  it  was  separated  by  a  great 
marshy  tract,  the  modern  Lake  Menzaleh,  which  in 
long.  32°  20'  penetrates  deep  into  the  country,  and 
renders  a  march  to  the  south-east  necessary  in  order 
to  reach  the  eastern  frontier  of  Egypt.  The  rendez- 
vous must,  consequently,  have  been  appointed  for 
some  place  in  this  direction ;  and  it  is  in  this  direction 
that  we  must  seek  it. 

This  place  is  termed  both  in  Exodus  (ch.  xii.  37  ; 
xiii.  20)  and  in  Numbers  (ch.  xxxiii.  5,6)''  Succoth  " 
— i.e.,  ''Tents"  or  "Booths" — an  equivalent  of  the 
Greek  I/.rfmi^  which  is  often  used  as  a  geographical 
designation.  It  has  been  proposed  to  identify  Suc- 
coth with  an  Egyptian  district  called  "  Thuku "  or 
"Thukut,"^  and  more  recently  with  the  newly-discov- 
ered town  of  Pithom^  (Tel-el-Maskouteh).  There  is 
no  evidence,  however,  that  Pithom  was  ever  called 
Succoth,  nor  would   Tel-el-Maskouteh    have   been   a 

^Brugsch,  "History  of  Egypt,"  translated  by  Philip  Smith,  2d  edit., 

p.  370-4- 

2  Stanley  Poole  in  the  British  Quarterly  Review,  July^  1883,  p.  1 1 3. 


226  BAB YL ON  AND  EGYPT. 

convenient  rendezvous  for  two  millions  of  persons, 
with  their  flocks  and  herds.  The  Wady  Toumilat 
offers  but  a  thin  thread  of  verdure  along  the  line  of 
the  fresh-water  canal,  and  though  a  convenient  route 
for  those  who  came  from  the  more  southern  part  of 
the  "  land  of  Goshen,"  would  have  been  very  much 
out  of  the  way  for  such  as  started  from  the  more 
northern  portion,  as  from  Tanis,  or  from  the  town  of 
Goshen  (Qosem)  itself  But  the  district  of  Thukut,  if 
it  lay  where  Dr.  Trumbull  places  it,^  north  and  north- 
west of  Lake  Timseh,  would  be  a  very  convenient 
place  for  a  general  muster,  affording  a  wide  space  and 
abundant  pasture  in  the  spring-time,  and  easily  reached 
both  from  south-west  and  north-west — -in  the  one  case 
by  the  Wady  Toumilat,  in  the  other  by  way  of  Tel- 
Dafneh  and  the  western  shore  of  Lake  Ballah.  This 
position  for  Thukut  seems  indeed  to  be  definitely  fixed 
by  the  discoveiy  of  the  ruins  of  Pithom,  the  capital 
of  Thukut,  at  Tel-el-Maskouteh,  combined  with  the 
statement  in  an  Eg}^ptian  text,^  that  Thukut  was  a 
region  just  within  the  Egyptian  frontier,  suited  for 
grazing,  and  in  the  vicinity  of  some  lakes.  Dr. 
Brugsch's  location  of  it  on  the  southern  shores  of 
Lake  Menzaleh  became  impossible  from  the  moment 
that  Tel-el-Maskouteh  was  proved  to  mark  the  site  of 
Pithom. 

It  may,  perhaps,  be   objected   to   the   location    of 
Succoth  on  the  north  and  west  of  Lake  Timseh,  that 

^See  "  Kadesh-Barnea,"  pp.  392-5, 

2  Brugsch,  "  History  of  Eg\'pt,"  vol  ii.,  p.  133, 


NOTICES  IN  EXODUS  AND  NUMBERS.  227 

the  distance  is  thirty-five  miles  from  Rameses  (Tanis), 
and  therefore  could  not  have  been  traversed  in  a  day. 
But  nothing  is  said  in  Exodus,  or  elsewhere  in  Scrip- 
ture, with  respect  to  the  length  of  time  occupied  by 
the  journey  between  any  two  of  the  stations  men- 
tioned, except  in  one  instance,  when  the  time  occupied 
was  *'  three  days "  (Exod.  xv.  22 ;  Numb,  xxxiii.  8). 
It  took  a  month  for  the  multitude  to  reach  the  wilder- 
ness of  Sin  from  their  starting-point  (Exod.  xii.  18; 
xvi.  i) ;  during  this  time  we  have  only  six  stations 
mentioned ;  it  took  above  a  fortnight  for  them  to  move 
from  the  wilderness  of  Sin  to  the  plain  before  Sinai 
(ch.  xvi.  i;  xix.  i);  along  this  route  are  mentioned 
only  three  stations  (Numb,  xxxiii.  1 2-1 5).  Thus  there 
is  every  reason  for  supposing  that  the  journey  from 
station  to  station  occupied,  in  most  cases,  several  days. 
The  children  of  Israel  "  took  their  journey  from 
Succoth  and  encamped  in  Etham,"  or  "  at  Etham,  in 
the  edge  of  the  wilderness  "  (Exod.  xiii.  20).  No 
name  resembling  Etham  is  to  be  found  in  the  geograph- 
ical nomenclature  of  Egypt,  either  native  or  classical. 
Hence  it  is  suspected  that  the  word  is  rather  a 
common  appellation  than  a  proper  name.  "  Khetam  " 
in  Egyptian  meant  "  fortress  " ;  and  various  khetaniu 
are  mentioned  in  the  inscriptions — one  near  Pelusium, 
called  the  "  khetam  of  Zor '.' ;  another  near  Tanis ;  a 
third,  called  the  "khetam  of  King  Menephthah," 
within  the  region  of  Thukot.^     The  eastern  frontier 

1  Trumbull,  "Kadesh-Barnea,"  p.  329;  Brugsch,  "  History  of  Egypt," 
vol.  ii.,  p.  380. 


228  BAB  YL  ON  AND  EG  YP T. 

was,  in  fact,  guarded  by  a  series  of  such  fortresses, 
perhaps  connected  together  by  a  wall  or  rampart ;  and 
especially  the  routes  out  of  Egypt  were  thus  guarded 
and  watched.  It  was  probably  to  one  of  these 
"khetams" — that  which  guarded  the  way  out  of 
Egypt,  known  to  the  Hebrews  as  the  "  way  of  Shur  " 
(Gen.  xvi.  7) — that  the  march  of  the  Israelites  was 
directed  from  Succoth.  The  khetam  lay  *'  in  the  edge 
of  the  wilderness,"  and  may  perhaps  be  identified  with 
that  of  King  Menephthah.  It  was  probably  not  far 
from  the  Bir  Makdal  of  the  maps,  situated  about  ten 
miles  east  of  the  Suez  Canal,  east  by  north  of  Ismailia. 
The  multitude  must  have  supposed  that  they  were 
now  about  to  enter  the  wilderness.  They  were  **  in  its 
edge."  Their  leaders  had  doubtless  brought  with 
them  the  king's  permission  to  pass  the  frontier  fortress. 
The  expectation  must  have  been  that  on  the  morrow 
they  would  quit  Egypt  for  ever.  But  here  God  inter- 
posed. Had  the  Israelites  passed  out  of  Egypt  at  this 
point,  the  march  would  naturally  have  been  across  the 
desert  some  way  south  of  Lake  Serbonis  to  the  Wady 
El  Arish,  and  thence  along  the  coast  of  the  Mediter- 
ranean to  Gaza  and  the  low  tract  of  the  Shefeleh.  But 
the  nation  was  not  yet  in  a  fit  condition  to  meet  and 
contend  with  the  war-like  people  of  that  rich  and 
valuable  region — the  Philistines.  God  accordingly, 
who  guided  the  march  by  the  pillar  of  the  cloud  and 
of  fire  (ch.  xiii.  21,  22),  "  led  them  not  the  way  of  the 
land  of  the  Philistines,  although  that  was  near  ;  for 
God  said,  Lest  the  people  repent  when  they  see  war, 


NOTICES  IN  EXODUS  AND  NUMBERS.  229 

and  return  to  Egypt :  but  God  led  the  people  about, 
the  way  of  the  wilderness  of  the  Red  Sea"  (ib.  17, 
18).  Moreover,  a  direction  was  given  through  Moses 
to  the  people,  "  that  they  turn  and  encamp  before  Pi- 
hahiroth,  between  Migdol  and  the  sea,  over  against 
Baal-Zephon "  (ch.  xiv.  2).  It  is  clear  that  at  this 
point  the  direction  of  the  march  was  changed ;  and  so 
far  all  are  agreed.  But  was  the  "  turn  "  towards  the 
left  or  towards  the  right  ?  Was  the  "  sea  "  by  which 
they  were  commanded  to  encamp  the  Mediterranean 
or  the  Red  Sea  ? 

It  is  the  main  point  of  Dr.  Brugsch's  theory  that  he 
holds  "the  sea"  to  have  been  the  Mediterranean.  He 
professes  to  find  in  this  direction  a  Migdol,  a  Pi- 
hahiroth,  and  a  Baal-Zephon.  The  Migdol  is  twenty 
miles  from  the  Pi-hahiroth,  and  the  Pi-hahiroth  twenty- 
five  from  the  Baal-Zephon,  which  is  thus  forty-five 
from  the  Migdol,  for  the  three  are  nearly  in  a  straight 
line.  The  Pi-hahiroth  and  the  Baal-Zephon  are  not 
visible  the  one  from  the  other.^  Still,  though  these 
particulars  of  distance  and  position  ill  accord  with  the 
expressions  used  in  Exod.  xiv.  2  and  Numb,  xxxiii.  7, 
which  imply  proximity  and  the  being  within  view,  it 
would  have  been  a  most  curious  circumstance  had 
there  been  on  this  side  of  the  Isthmus  of  Suez,  and 
also  on  the  opposite  one,  three  places  similarly  named 
within  a  moderate  distance  of  each  other.  But  on 
examination    it   appears   that   only  one  of  the  three 

1  Mr.  Greville  Chester  in  the  "  Quarterly  Statement  of  the  Palestine 
Exploration  Fund,"  July,  i88o,  p.  154,  note. 


230  BAB  YL  ON  AND  E  G  YPT. 

names  is  attached  to  any  locality  on  the  north  side  of 
the  Isthmus  otherwise  than  by  conjecture.  Dr. 
Brugsch  does  not  profess  to  have  found  in  the  remains 
of  ancient  Egypt  any  place  called  Pi-hahiroth  or  any 
called  Baal-Zephon.  He  finds  in  Egyptian  a  word 
khirot,  signifying  "gulfs,"  and  he  finds  in  Diodorus  a 
mention  that  there  were  ftdpadpa,  "  pits,"  at  the  western 
end  of  Lake  Serbonis.  Out  of  these  two  facts  he 
constructs  an  Egyptian  Pi-khirot,^  which  he  thinks 
may  have  been  the  original  of  the  Pi-hahiroth  of  the 
Hebrews.  Baal-Zephon  he  finds  only  mentioned  in 
Egyptian  documents  as  a  God, — he  conjectures  his 
identity  with  Zeus  Kasios, — and  upon  this  pure  con- 
jecture locates  his  temple  where  one  stood,  erected  to 
Zeus  Kasios,  in  post-Alexandrine  times.  If  we  put 
aside  these  two  mere  conjectures,  there  remains  only  a 
Migdol,  which  has  a  proved  existence  in  these  parts, 
though  its  exact  emplacement  is  uncertain. 

Migdol,  however,  is  a  generic  term,  meaning  "a 
watch-tower."  There  are  likely  to  have  been  many 
"  Migdols  "  on  the  eastern  frontier  of  Egypt,  and  it  is 
maintained^  that  there  are  traces  of  at  least  three. 
One  of  these,  called  by  the  Greeks  Magdolos,  was 
certainly  towards  the  north,  not  far  from  Pelusium  ; 
another,  central,  has  left  its  name  to  Bir  Makdal ;  a 
third,  towards  the  south,  is  represented  by  the  existing 


•  ^  "  History  of  Egypt,"  vol,  ii.,  p.  393.     The  real  Egyptian  original  of 
Pi-hahiroth  seems  to  have  been  "  Pi-keheret,"  which  is  mentioned  on  a 
tablet  of  the  time  of  Ptolemy  Philadelphus,  found  at  Tel-el-Maskouteh. 
2  Trumbull,  "  Kadesh-Barnea,"  pp.  374-8. 


NOTICES  IN  EXODUS  AND  NUMBERS.  231 

Muktala.  This  last  may  well  be  the  Migdol  of 
Exodus. 

Dr.  Brugsch's  theory  that  Lake  Serbonis  is  the  true 
''  Yam  Suph,"  or  "  Sea  of  Weeds,"  wrongly  under- 
stood by  the  Septuagint  translators  as  "  the  Red  Sea," 
has  been  completely  disposed  of  by  Mr.  Greville 
Chester,  who  shows,  first,  that  Lake  Serbonis  is  almost 
wholly  devoid  of  vegetation,  either  marine  or  lacus- 
trine ;  ^  secondly,  that  the  spit  of  land  between  it  and 
the  Mediterranean  is  not  continuous,  but  interrupted 
at  the  eastern  extremity  of  the  lake  by  a  deep  sea- 
channel  ;  ^  thirdly,  that  there  is  no  isthmus  opposite 
El  Gelse  dividing  the  lake  into  nearly  equal  portions,^ 
as  Dr.  Brugsch  supposed ;  and,  fourthly,  that  the  spit 
of  land  is  above  fifty  miles  long,  and  takes  a  lightly- 
equipped  traveller  three  days  to  traverse,*  instead  of 
being  passable  in  the  course  of  a  night.  It  may  be 
added  that,  as  the  term  "  Yam  Suph  "  is  allowed  by 
all,  including  Dr.  Brugsch,  to  designate  the  Red  Sea 
in  Exod.  xiii.  17  and  Numb,  xxxiii.  10,  11,  it  is  incon- 
ceivable that  the  same  writer  should  in  the  same 
narrative  use  it  also  of  another  far-distant  sheet  of 
water  (Exod.  xv.  4,  22). 

The  propriety  of  the  name  "  Yam  Suph,"  as  applied 
to  the  Red  Sea,  has  been  well  illustrated  by  Dr. 
Trumbull.^     "  Suph  "  in  Hebrew  means  at  once  "  sea- 

1  "  Quarterly  Statement "  of  Palestine  Exploration  Fund  for  July, 
1880,  p.  155. 

=^Ibid.,  p.  157.  3  Ibid.,  p.  154. 

*  Ibid.,  pp.  152-157.  ^  "  Kadesh-Barnea,"  pp.  353-356. 


232 


BAB  YL  ON  AND  EG  YPT. 


weed"  (Jonah  ii.  5),  and  "  rushes  "  or  "sedge  "  (Exod. 
ii.  3,  etc.).  The  Red  Sea  is  famous  for  the  number  and 
variety  of  its  marine  growths.  "  Weeds  and  corals 
are  to  be  seen  in  such  profusion  and  beauty  at  many 
places  along  the  shores  of  the  Red  Sea,  and  again 
below  its  surface,  as  disclosed  at  low  water,  as  almost 
to  have  the  appearance  of  groves  and  gardens."  ^ 
Again,  "  the  jiinciis  aaitus,  arundo  (Egyptiaca,  or 
arimdo  Isaica,  grows  commonly  on  the  shore  of  the 
Red  Sea,  so  that  at  this  day  a  bay  of  the  same  is 
called  GJmbbet-el-biis,  or  *  Reed  Bay.'  "  ^  The  observ- 
ing naturalist,  Klunzinger,  says  that,  "  Where  the  soil 
of  the  desert  along  that  coast  is  kept  moist  by  lagoons 
of  sea  water,  the  eye  is  gladdened  by  spreading 
meadows  of  green  verdure.  The  coast  flora  of  the 
desert,  which  requires  the  saline  vapour  of  the  sea,  is 
peculiar.  A  celebrated  plant  is  the  shora  (Avicennia 
officinalis),  which  forms  large  dense  groves  in  the  sea, 
these  being  laid  bare  only  at  very  low  ebb.  Ships  are 
laden  with  its  wood,  which  is  used  as  fuel,  and  many 
camels  live  altogether  on  its  laurel-like  leaves."  He 
divides,  indeed,  the  shore  line  of  the  Red  Sea  into  the 
**  outer  shore  zone,"  or  the  reef  line,  and  the  "  inner 
shore  or  sea-grass  zone."  Even  in  the  outer  shore 
zone  there  "  flourish  also  in  many  inlets  of  the  sea 
thickets  of  the  laurel-like  shora  shrub,"  as  above 
described  ;  and  there  are  "  sea-grass  pools."      In  the 

*  Laborde,  "Voyage  de  I'Arabie  Petree,"  p.  5. 

"^  Stickel,  "  Der  Israeliten  Auszug  aus  ^gypten "  in  "  Studien  und 
Kritiken"  for  1850,  p.  331. 


NOTICES  IN  EXODUS  AND  NUMBERS.  233 

inner  shore  zone,  "  among  the  rocks,  which  are  either 
bare  or  covered  with  a  blackish  and  red  mucilaginous 
sea-weed,"  there  "  grow  green  phanerogamous  grasses 
of  the  family  of  the  Naiadese."  ^ 

But  if  the  sea  intended  in  the  directions  given  to 
Moses  (Exod.  xiv.  2)  was  the  Red  Sea,  Migdol,  Pi- 
hahiroth,  and  Baal-Zephon  must  be  sought  towards 
the  south  ;  and  the  **  turn  "  in  the  journey  (ibid,  and 
Numb,  xxxiii.  7),  of  which  we  have  spoken,  must  have 
been  a  turn  to  the  right.  It  was  to  some  extent  a 
*'  turning  back,''  as  the  Hebrew  word  used  implies,  a 
*'  return "  into  Egypt  when  the  frontier  had  been 
reached,  and  might  have  been  crossed.  It  looked 
like  hesitation  and  doubt,  like  the  commencement  of 
an  aimless,  purposeless  wandering.  Hence  the  Pha- 
raoh took  heart,  and  made  preparations  for  a  pursuit 
at  the  head  of  an  army  (ch.  xiv.  3,  5-9). 

If  the  ''bitter  lakes  "  were  (as  supposed  by  many^) 
connected  at  the  time  with  the  northern  end  of  the 
Red  Sea,  as  a  marshy  inlet,  overflowed  at  high  water, 
and  Pi-hahiroth  were  near  Muktala,  the  Israelites,  to 
reach  it,  must  have  skirted  the  northern  extremity  of 
the  lakes,  and  have  proceeded  southward  along  their 
western  shores.  A  march  of  three  days  would  bring 
them  into  the  plain  north-west  of  Suez,  at  the  western 
edge  of  which  the  station  Muktala  (Migdol)  is  found. 
The   Israelites  *'  encamped  between  Migdol  and  the 

1  Quoted  from  Dr.  Trumbull's  "  Kadesh-Barnea,"  pp.  355-6. 

2  As  Kurtz,  Sharpe,  Stanley  Poole,  Reginald  Stuart  Poole,  Canon 
Cook,  Lieutenant  Conder,  Burton,  Villiers  Stuart,  Gratz,  and  others. 


234  BAB  YLON  AND  EG  YPT. 

sea,"  for  which  there  would  be  abundant  room,  as  the 
distance  is  above  ten  miles.  They  were  "  beside  Pi- 
hahiroth  and  before  Baal-Zephon  "  (ch.  xiv.  9).  These 
conditions  would  be  sufficiently  answered  if  Pi-hahiroth 
were  at  Ajrud,  which  is  thought  to  retain  a  trace  of 
the  name,^  and  Baal-Zephon  were  on  the  north-eastern 
flank  of  Jebel  Atakah.  Baal-Zephon  is  not  necessarily 
a  Phoenician  name,  for  the  Egyptians  had  adopted 
"  Baal "  as  a  god  long  before  the  time  of  Menephthah, 
and  Zephon  (Zapouna  or  Typhon)  was  altogether 
Egyptian.  There  is  no  proof  beyond  the  notices  in 
Exodus  that  he  had  a  temple,  or  a  town  named  after 
him,  in  this  quarter ;  but  neither  is  there  any  proof  of 
his  having  had  one  in  any  other  part  of  Egypt.  It 
has  been  argued  that  the  position  on  Jebel  Ataka 
would  be  one  exactly  adapted  to  such  a  god  as  Baal- 
Zephon;^  but  we  scarcely  know  enough  of  the  Egyp- 
tian religion  to  be  sure  of  this.  We  can  only  say  that 
here,  on  the  western  coast  of  the  Gulf  of  Suez,  would 
be  ample  room  for  the  encampment  of  the  entire 
Israelitish  host ;  that  in  this  position  it  might  well 
seem  that  "  the  wilderness  had  shut  them  in  "  (ch.  xiv. 
3) ;  and  that  the  host  would  be  "  before  a  Migdol " 
(Numb,  xxxiii.  7),  and  perhaps  "  beside  a  Pi-hahiroth  " 
(Exod.  xiv.  9).  The  sea  in  front  was  but  two  or  three 
miles  across,  and  might  easily  have  been  passed  in  a 


^So  Ebers  ("  Gosen  zum  Sinai,"  p.  526),  Kurtz  ("Hist,  of  Old 
Covenant,"  vol.  ii.,  p.  323),  Keil  and  Delitzsch  ("  Bibl.  Comment."  on 
Exod.  xiv.  2),  etc. 

2  Trumbull,  "  Kadesh-Barnea,"  p.  421. 


NOTICES  IN  EXODUS  AND  NUMBERS.  235 

night ;  the  bottom  was  such  as  would  naturally  clog 
the  Egyptian  chariot  wheels  (ver.  25),  and  the  further 
shore  was  destitute  of  springs,  a  true  "  wilderness  " 
(ch.  XV.  22),  where  the  Israelites  may  well  have  gone 
**  three  days  without  water." 


CHAPTER  XVIII. 

FURTHER   NOTICES    OF    EGYPT   IN    EXODUS. 

In  considering  the  Biblical  notices  of  Egypt  contained 
in  the  Book  of  Exodus,  we  have  hitherto  confined 
ourselves  almost  entirely  to  the  main  narrative,  and 
indeed  to  such  points  of  it  as  are  capable  of  illus- 
tration from  historical  documents,  monumental  or 
literary.  But  the  full  force  of  the  illustration  which 
profane  sources  are  capable  of  lending  to  the  Scrip- 
tural account  cannot  be  rightly  estimated,  unless  we 
add  to  this  some  consideration  of  those  various  minor 
matters,  incidentally  touched  upon,  which  constitute 
the  entourage  of  the  main  narrative,  and  render  it 
altogether  so  graphic  and  life-like.  These  touches 
must  be  either  the  natural  utterances  of  one  familiar 
with  the  country  at  the  time,  as  Moses,  the  traditional 
author  of  Exodus,  would  have  been,  or  the  artful 
imitation  of  such  utterances  by  a  later  writer,  unfa- 
miliar with  the  time,  and  probably  with  the  scene, 
drawing  upon  his  imagination  or  his  stock  of  anti- 
quarian knowledge.  In  the  former  case,  a  general 
agreement  between  the  Biblical  portraiture  and  the 
facts  as  otherwise  known  to  us  might  be  confidently 
236 


NOTICES  IN  EXODUS. 


237 


looked  for;  in  the  latter,  there  would  be  sure  to 
appear,  on  examination,  repeated  contradictions  and 
discrepancies. 

It  will  be  the  object  of  the  present  chapter  to  show 
that  there  is  a  close  accord  between  the  Scriptural 
notices  and  the  facts  as  otherwise  known  to  us  in 
respect  of  almost  all  the  minor  matters  of  which  we 
have  spoken.  These  may  be  summed  up  under  the 
following  principal  heads : — (ci)  the  climate  and  pro- 
ductions of  Egypt,  (Jj)  the  dress  and  domestic  habits 
of  the  people,  (c)  the  ordinary  food  of  the  labouring 
classes,  {d^  customs  connected  with  farming  and 
cattle-keeping,  and  (e)  miscellaneous  customs. 

The  climate  of  Egypt  is  touched  upon  mainly  in 
connection  with  the  seventh  plague,  in  ch.  ix.  We 
find  there  heavy  rain  (ver.  33),  hail,  thunder  and 
lightning  mentioned  as  occurring  in  early  spring,  and 
doing  great  damage  to  the  crops.  The  particular 
visitation  is  spoken  of  as  miraculous  in  coming  at  the 
command  of  Moses  (ver.  23),  and  as  extraordinary  in 
its  intensity  (ver.  24),  but  not  as  a  thing  previously 
unknown.  On  the  contrary,  it  is  implied  that  similar 
visitations  of  less  severity  were  not  unusual.  Objection 
has  been  taken  to  the  narrative  on  this  account ;  and 
it  has  been  represented  as  indicative  of  a  great  want 
of  acquaintance  with  the  climatic  circumstances  of  the 
country,  since  rain  and  hail  are,  it  has  been  said, 
unknown  in  Egypt.  But  the  only  ground  for  such  a 
statement  is  the  authority  of  the  classical  writers. 
Herodotus    regarded    rain    in    Upper    Egypt    as    a 


238  BAB  YL  ON  AND  E  G  YPT. 

prodigy/  and  Mela  goes  so  far  as  to  call  Egypt  gener- 
ally "a  land  devoid  of  showers."^  But  the  observa- 
tion of  modern  travellers  runs  counter  to  such  views,^ 
and  supports  the  credit  of  the  author  of  Exodus.  In 
Upper  Egypt,  indeed,  "very  heavy  rain  is  unusual, 
and  happens  only  about  once  in  ten  years.  Four  or 
five  showers  fall  there  every  year,  after  long  intervals."^ 
But  in  Lower  Egypt,  rain  is  as  common  in  winter  as 
it  is  in  the  south  of  Europe.  Storms  of  great  severity 
occur  occasionally,  more  especially  in  February  and 
March,  when  snow,  hail,  thunder  and  lightning  are  not 
uncommon.  The  Rev.  T.  H.  Tooke  "  describes  a  storm 
of  extreme  severity,  which  lasted  twenty-four  hours, 
in  the  middle  of  February,"^  as  high  up  the  valley  as 
Beni-Hassan.  Other  travellers,  as  Seetzen  and  Will- 
mann,  speak  of  storms  of  thunder  and  hail  in  March. 
"  The  ravines  in  the  valley  of  the  kings'  tombs  near 
Thebes,  and  the  precautions  taken  in  the  oldest 
temples  at  Thebes  to  guard  the  roofs  against  rain  by 
lions'  mouths,  or  gutters,  for  letting  off  the  water  from 
them,"^  prove  sufficiently  that  there  was  no  great 
difference  between  ancient  and  modern  times  in 
respect  of  the  rainfall  of  the  Nile  valley. 

^  Herod,  iii.  lo. 

2  Pomp.  Mel.,  "De   Situ  Orbis,"  i.  9;    *'^gyptus  terra  expers  im- 
brium." 

'  See  the  passages  collected  by  Hengstenberg,  "  Egypt  and  the  Books 
of  Moses,"  pp.  117,  118. 

*  Wilkinson  in  Rawlinson's  "  Herodotus,"  vol.  ii.,  p.  409,  note  4. 
^"Speaker's  Commentaiy,"  vol.  i.,  p.  285. 

*  Wilkinson,  1.  s.  c.     Compare  "  Ancient  Egyptians,"  vol.  ii.,  p.  426. 


NOTICES  IN  EXODUS.  239 

Among  the  cultivated  products  of  Egypt  mentioned 
in  Exodus,  the  principal  are,  wheat,  barley,  flax,  and 
rye,  or  spelt  (ix.  32),  to  which  may  be  added  from  the 
Book  of  Numbers  (xi.  5)  cucumbers,  melons,  onions, 
garlick,  and  leeks.  Grains  of  wheat  have  been  found 
abundantly  in  the  coffins  containing  mummies,  and 
"  mummy  wheat "  is  said  to  have  been  raised  from* 
such  grains  in  various  parts  of  Europe.  The  monu- 
ments, moreover,  represent  to  us  in  numerous  instan- 
ces the  growth  of  wheat,  the  mode  in  which  it  was 
cut,  bound  into  sheaves,  or  gathered  into  baskets,  and 
threshed  by  the  tread  of  cattle  on  a  threshing-floor.^ 
Barley  does  not  appear  to  be  represented,^  but  its 
growth  is  manifest.  It  is  mentioned  as  the  ordinary 
food  of  the  Egyptian  horses,^  and  as  one  of  the  chief 
materials  used  in  the  making  of  bread.^  It  was  also 
largely  employed  in  the  manufacture  of  beer.^  Flax 
was  likewise  cultivated  on  an  extensive  scale  to  furnish 
the  linen  garments  necessarily  worn  by  the  priests,  and 
preferentially  by  others,  and  needed  also  for  mummy- 
cloths,  corselets,  and  various  other  uses.  Spelt,  like 
wheat,  is  represented  on  the  monuments,^  and  accord- 
ing to  Herodotus,  was  the  grain  ordinarily  consumed 
by  the  Egyptians,^  as  is  the  doora — probably  the  same 
plant — at  the  present  day.     Herodotus  also  witnesses 

1  See  Wilkinson,  "Ancient  Eg>^ptians,"  vol.  ii.,  pp.  418-427. 

2  The  Eg>'ptian  wheat  being  bearded,  it  is  not  easy  to  say  in  some 
cases  whether  barley  or  wheat  is  represented. 

3 "Records  of  the  Past,"  vol.  ii.,  p.  75.         "^Ibid.,  vol.  viii.,  p.  44. 

5  Wilkinson,  "Ancient  Egyptians,"  vol.  ii.,  p.  42. 

6lbid.,  p.  427.  7  Herod,  ii.  36. 


240  BAB  YL  ON  AND  E  G  YPT. 

to  the  cultivation  oi  onions  and  of  garlick/  while  that 
of  cucumbers  is  attested  by  their  being  frequently- 
figured  in  the  tombs.  The  leeks  of  Egypt  had  the 
character  of  being  superior  to  all  others  in  the  time 
of  Pliny ,^  which  would  imply  a  long  anterior  cultiva- 
tion. Melons  are  among  the  most  abundant  of  the 
modern  products,  but  their  growth  in  ancient  times 
seems  not  to  be  distinctly  attested. 

The  abundant  use  of  personal  ornaments  by  the 
Egyptians,  and  especially  of  ornaments  in  silver  and 
gold,  implied  in  the  direction  given  to  the  Israelites  to 
**  borrow  "  such  things  of  their  neighbours  and  lodgers 
before  their  departure  from  Egypt  (ch.  iii.  22),  and  in 
the  "  spoil  "  which  they  thus  acquired  (ch.  xii.  36),  is 
among  the  facts  most  copiously  attested  by  the  extant 
remains.  Ornaments  in  gold  and  silver  have  been 
found  in  the  tombs,  not  only  of  the  great  and  opulent, 
but  even  of  comparatively  poor  persons  ;  they  were  fre- 
quently worn  by  the  men,  and  probably  few  women 
were  without  them.  Among  the  articles  obtained  from 
the  tombs  are  "  rings,  bracelets,  armlets,  necklaces,  ear- 
rings, and  numerous  trinkets  belonging  to  the  toilet."^ 
Most  of  these  articles  were  common  to  the  two  sexes ; 
but  ear-rings  were  affected  especially,  if  not  exclu- 
sively, by  the  women. 

Egyptian  men  of  the  upper  class  carried,  as  a  matter 
of  course,  "walking-sticks."^      Hence  the  "rod"   of 

1  Herod.,  ii.  125.  2  pij^^  u  jj.  N."  xix.  t,-^. 

^Wilkinson,  "Ancient  Egyptians,"  vol.  ii.,  p.  236. 
*  Ibid.,  vol.  ii.,  p.  28 ;  vol.  iii.,  p.  447. 


NOTICES  IN  EXODUS.  241 

Aaron  was  naturally  brought  into  the  presence  of 
Pharaoh  (ch.  vii.  10);  and  the  magicians  had  also 
"rods"  in  their  hands  (ib.  ver.  12),  which  they  **  cast 
down  "  before  Pharaoh,  as  Aaron  had  cast  his.  These 
"  rods,"  or  rather  "  sticks,"  are  continually  represented 
on  the  monuments  :  no  Egyptian  lord  is  without  one;^ 
at  an  entertainment  there  was  an  attendant  whose 
especial  duty  it  was  to  receive  the  sticks  of  the  male 
guests  on  their  arrival,  and  restore  them  at  their 
departure.^ 

The  Egyptians  employed  "  furnaces  "  (ch.  ix.  8)  for 
various  purposes,  "  ovens  "  (ch.  viii.  3)  for  the  baking 
of  their  bread,  "  kneading-troughs  "  (ibid.)  for  the  for- 
mation of  the  dough,  and  "  hand-mills  "  (ch.  xi.  5)  for 
the  grinding  of  the  corn  into  flour.  "Their  mills," 
says  Sir  Gardner  Wilkinson,  "  were  of  simple  and  rude 
construction.  They  consisted  of  two  circular  stones, 
nearly  flat,  the  lower  one  fixed,  while  the  other  turned 
on  a  pivot,  or  shaft,  rising  from  the  centre  of  that 
beneath  it;  and  the  grain,  descending  through  an 
aperture  in  the  upper  stone,  immediately  above  the 
pivot,  gradually  underwent  the  process  of  grinding  as 
it  passed.  It  was  turned  by  a  woman,  seated,  and 
holding  a  handle  fixed  perpendiculai  ly  near  the  edge. 
.  .  .  The  stone  of  which  the  hand-mills  were  made 
was  usually  a  hard  grit."^     Sir  Gardner  adds  in  a  note 

1  Birch,  "  Egypt  from  the  Earliest  Times,"  p.  45 :  "  The  Egyptian 
lord  .  .  .  carried  a  wand  or  walking-stick  as  a  sign  of  dignity  or 
authority." 

2  Wilkinson,  "Ancient  Egyptians,"  vol.  i.,  pi.  xi.,  fig.  lo. 

3  Ibid.,  vol.  i.,  p.  359. 

16 


242  BAB YL ON  AND  EGYPT. 

that  he  draws  these  conclusions  from  the  fragments  of 
the  old  stones  discovered  among  the  ancient  remains. 
The  same  writer  witnesses  to  the  use  by  the  ancient 
Egyptians  of  furnaces,  ovens,  and  kneading-troughs.^ 

One  curious  custom  of  an  Egyptian  household 
obtains  incidental  mention  in  the  account  of  the  first 
plague,  viz.,  the  storing  of  water  in  "  vessels  of  wood 
and  in  vessels  of  stone  "  (ch.  vii.  19).  Water  being 
exceedingly  abundant  in  Egypt  by  reason  of  the  Nile, 
with  its  numerous  branches,  natural  and  artificial, 
which  conveyed  the  indispensable  fluid  almost  to 
every  house,  "  storing "  would  have  been  quite 
unnecessary  but  for  one  circumstance.  The  Nile 
water  during  the  period  of  the  inundation  is  turbid, 
and  requires  to  be  kept  for  a  considerable  time  before 
it  becomes  palatable  and  fit  for  use  by  the  muddy 
particles  sinking  gradually  to  the  bottom,  and  leaving 
pure  water  at  the  top.  To  produce  this  effect,  it  has 
always  been,  and  still  is,  usual  to  keep  the  Nile  water 
in  jars,  or  stone- troughs,  until  the  sediment  is  deposited, 
and  the  fluid  rendered  fit  for  drinking.^ 

Another  still  more  remarkable  custom  is  brought 
under  notice  by  the  narrative  in  ch.  i.  "  When  ye  do 
the  office  of  a  midwife  to  the  Hebrew  women,"  says 
the  Pharaoh  to  Shiphrah  and  Puah,  ''and  see  them  upon 
the  stools^  if  it  be  a  son,  then  ye  shall  kill  him,"  etc. 
The  incident  is  one  which  its  delicate  nature"  unfits  for 
representation,  and  the  monuments  thus  fail  to  confirm 

*  Wilkinson,  "Ancient  Egyptians,"  vol.  ii.,  pp.  34,  192. 

2  Ibid.,  vol.  ii.,  p.  428.     Compare  Pococke,  "Travels,"  vol.  i.,  p.  312. 


NOTICES  IN  EXODUS,  243 

it;  but  a  modern  practice,  peculiar,  so  far  as  we  know, 
to  Egypt,  is  probably  the  direct  descendant  of  the 
ancient  one,  and  at  any  rate  lends  it  illustration. 
"  Two  or  three  days  before  the  expected  time  of 
delivery,"  says  Mr.  Lane,  in  his  account  of  the  manners 
and  customs  of  the  modern  Egyptians,  "  the  layah 
(midwife)  conveys  to  the  house  the  kiirsce  elwilddeh,  a 
chair  of  a  peculiar  form,  upon  which  the  patient  is  to 
be  seated  during  the  birth."  ^ 

The  ordinary  food  of  the  Israelites  during  the  time 
of  their  sojourn  in  Egypt  is  stated  in  one  place 
(Exod.  xvi.  3)  to  have  consisted  of  "  bread "  and 
"  flesh."  But  from  another  we  can  learn  that  it 
embraced  also  "  fish  "  in  abundance,  and  likewise  the 
following  vegetables :  "  cucumbers,  melons,  leeks, 
onions,  and  garlic  "  (Numb.  xi.  5).  That  bread  was 
its  staple  may  be  gathered  from  the  institution  of  the 
feast  of  unleavened  bread  (ch.  xii.  15-20),  as  well  as 
from  the  mention  of  "  dough  "  (ibid.  vers.  34,  39)  as 
the  only  provision  that  they  took  with  them,  besides 
their  beasts,  when  they  quitted  the  country.  Now 
''bread"  was  certainly  "the  staff  of  life"  to  the 
Egyptian  nation,  and  the  food  on  which  they  would 
naturally  nourish  their  slaves.  We  find  a  king  stating 
that  he  offered  in  a  single  temple  loaves  of  three 
distinct  kinds,  viz.,  "best  bread,"  "great  loaves  of 
bread  for  eating,"  and  "  loaves  of  barley  bread,"  to  the 
amount  of  6,272,431.^     He  also  offered  to  the  same 

1  Lane,  "  Modern  Egyptians,"  vol.  iii.,  p.  142. 
2 "Records  of  the  Past,"  vol.  viii.,  p.  44,  line  5. 


244  BAB  YL  ON  AND  E  G  YPT. 

temple  5,279,552  bushels  of  corn.^  "Bread"  is  the 
ordinary  representative  of  food  in  Egyptian  speech. 
The  good  man  "gives  bread  to  the  hungry  ";2  artisans 
labour  for  "  bread  "  ;  ^  "  bread  "  is  taken  out  to  the 
rustics  who  work  in  the  fields/  and  is  brought  for  the 
repast  of  young  maidens.^  Flesh,  on  the  other  hand, 
though  largely  consumed  by  the  rich,  was  generally 
beyond  the  means  of  the  poor;  and  the  Israelites 
longing  after  the  "  fleshpots  "  of  Egypt  can  only  be 
accounted  for  by  supposing  that  the  king  nourished 
his  labourers  on  a  more  generous  diet  than  was 
obtainable  by  the  working  classes  generally.  It  is  not 
likely,  however,  that  they  received  flesh  often.  We 
have  probably  in  Num.  xi.  5  the  main  constituents  of 
their  dietary  in  addition  to  bread.  Fish,  which  they 
"  did  eat  in  Egypt  freely,"  was  undoubtedly  one  of  the 
principal  articles  of  food  consumed  by  the  lower 
orders.  Herodotus  says  that  a  certain  number  of  the 
poorer  Egyptians  "  lived  entirely  on  fish."  ^  It  was  so 
abundant  that  it  was  necessarily  cheap.  The  Nile 
produced  several  kinds,  which  were  easily  caught; 
and  in  Lake  Moeris  the  abundance  of  the  fish  was 
such  that  the  Pharaohs  are  said  to  have  derived  from 
the  sale  a  revenue  of  above  ;^94,ooo  a  year.^  Lake 
Menzaleh  also,  and  the  other  lakes  near  the  coast,  must 

1  "  Records  of  the  Past,"  vol.  viii.,  p.  45,  line  13. 

2  Birch,  "  Egypt  from  the  Earliest  Times,"  p.  46. 
^"Records  of  the  Past,"  vol.  viii.,  p.  150. 

*Ibid.,  vol.  ii.,  p.  139,  5  ibi^.^  vol,  vi.,  p.  154. 

8  Herod,  ii.  92.  7  jbid.  ii.  149. 


NOTICES  IN  EXODUS. 


245 


have  yielded  a  considerable  supply.  The  fishermen 
of  Egypt  formed  a  numerous  class/  and  the  salting 
and  drying  of  fish  furnished  occupation  to  a  large 
number  of  persons.^  The  quantity  of  vegetable  food 
which  the  poorer  Egyptians  consumed  is  noted  by 
Diodorus,^  and  Herodotus  makes  out  that  the 
labourers  whom  Khufu  (Cheops)  employed  to  build 
the  great  pyramid  subsisted  mainly,  if  not  wholly,  on 
radishes,  onions,  and  garlic*  Cucurbitaceous  vege- 
tables are  at  present  among  the  most  abundant  pro- 
ductions of  the  Egyptian  soil,  and  the  monuments 
frequently  exhibit  them.^  On  the  whole,  therefore, 
the  dietary  assigned  to  the  Israelites  in  Egypt  may  be 
pronounced  such  as  the  country  was  well  capable  of 
furnishing,  and  such  as  agrees  in  most  particulars  with 
the  ordinary  food  of  the  Egyptian  labouring  class. 

The  customs  connected  with  farming  and  cattle- 
keeping  noticed  in  Exodus  and  the  later  books  of  the 
Pentateuch  include,  besides  the  cultivation  of  certain 
cereals  already  mentioned,  {a)  the  comparative  late- 
ness of  the  wheat  and  door  a  harvest  (ch.  ix.  31,  32); 
(b^  the  leaving  of  stubble  in  the  fields  after  the 
gathering  in  of  the  crops  (ch.  v.  12);  (r)  the  general 
cultivation  of  the  land  after  the  fashion  of  a  garden 
(Deut.  xi.  10);  (d^  the  employment  of  irrigation  in 
such  a  way  that  the  "  foot "  could  direct  the  course  of 

^  Herod,  ii.  92,  95  ;  "  Records  of  the  Past,"  vol.  viii.,  p.  153. 
2  Wilkinson,  "Ancient  Egyptians,"  vol.  ii.,  pp.  115-8. 
5  Diod.  Sic.  i.  80.  *  Herod,  ii.  125. 

^Wilkinson,  "Ancient  Egyptians,"  vol.  iii.,  pp.  419,  431. 


246  BAB  YL ON  AND  EG  YPT. 

the  life-giving  fluid  (ibid.) ;  (r)  the  cultivation  of  fruit- 
trees  (Exod.  ix.  25;  X.  15);  and  (/")  the  keeping  of 
cattle,  partly  in  the  fields,  partly  in  stalls,  or  sheds, 
where  they  were  protected  from  the  weather  (ch. 
ix.  19-25).  With  respect  to  the  first  of  these  points, 
it  may  be  observed  that  there  is  exactly  the  same 
difference  now  as  that  which  the  writer  of  Exodus 
notes, — "  Barley  ripens  and  flax  blossoms  about  the 
middle  of  February,  or,  at  the  latest,  early  in  March,"  ^ 
while  the  wheat  harvest  does  not  begin  till  April. 
There  is  thus  a  full  month  between  the  barley  and  the 
wheat  harvest.^     The  doora  is  also  a  late  crop. 

The  mode  of  reaping  wheat  which  prevailed  in 
ancient  Egypt  is  amply  represented  upon  the  monu- 
ments, and  appears  to  have  been  such  as  to  leave 
abundant  stubble  in  the  fields,  as  implied  in  ch.  v.  12. 
Not  more  than  about  a  foot  of  the  straw  was  cut  with 
the  ear,  two  feet  or  more  being  left.^  The  barley  was 
probably  reaped  in  the  same  way. 

It  is  not,  perhaps,  quite  clear  what  is  meant  in  Deut. 
xi.  10  by  the  land  of  Egypt  being  cultivated  "as  a 
garden  of  herbs  ";  but  most  probably  the  reference  is, 
as  Wilkinson  suggests,^  to  the  ordinary  implement  of 
cultivation,  the  plough,  being  largely  dispensed  with, 
and  a  slight  dressing  with  the  hoe,  if  even  so  much  as 
that,  used  instead.     Herodotus  witnesses  to  the  preva- 

*  Canon  Cook  in  the  "  Speaker's  Commentary,"  vol.  i.,  p.  286. 

2  Birch  in  Wilkinson's  "  Ancient  Egyptians,"  vol.  ii.,  p.  42,  note. 
'Ibid.,  vol.  ii.,  pp.  418-427. 

*  Wilkinson,  "Ancient  Egyptians,"  vol.  ii.,  p.  389,  note. 


NO  TICES  IN  EXOD  US.  247 

lence  of  this  method  of  cultivation/  and  the  monu- 
ments occasionally  represent  it. 

The  absolute  necessity  of  irrigation,  and  the  nature 
of  the  irrigation,  implied  in  the  expression,  "  where 
thou  sowedst  thy  seed,  and  wateredst  it  with  thy 
foot"  (Deut.  xi.  10),  receive  illustration  from  the 
pictures  in  the  tombs,  which  show  us  the  fields 
surrounded  by  broad  canals,  and  intersected  every- 
where by  cuttings  from  them,  continually  diminishing 
in  size,  until  at  last  they  are  no  more  than  rills  banked 
up  with  a  little  mud,  which  the  hand  or  "  foot "  might 
readily  remove  and  replace,  so  turning  the  water  in 
any  direction  that  might  be  required  by  the  cultivator. 

Fruit-trees  are  represented  on  the  monuments  as 
largely  cultivated  and  much  valued.  Among  them 
the  vine  holds  the  foremost  place.  A  sceptical  critic 
was  once  bold  enough  to  assert  that  the  statements  in 
the  Pentateuch  which  implied  the  existence  of  the 
vine  in  Egypt  were  distinct  evidence  of  ''  the  late 
origin  of  the  narrative."  ^  But  the  tombs  of  Beni- 
hassan,  which  are  anterior  to  the  Exodus,  contain 
"  representations  of  the  culture  of  the  vine,  the  vintage, 
the  stripping  off  and  carrying  away  of  the  grapes,  of 
two  kinds  of  winepresses,  the  one  moved  by  the 
strength  of  human  arms,  the  other  by  mechanical 
power,  the  storing  of  the  wine  in  bottles  or  jars,  and  its 
transportation  into  the  cellar."  ^     No  one  now  doubts 

1  Herod,  ii.  14. 

*  Von  Bohlen,  "Die  Genesis  historisch-critisch  erlautert,"  §  373. 
^  Champollion,  quoted  by  Hengstenberg,  "  Egypt  and  the  Books  of 
Moses,"  p.  15. 


248  BA BYLOAT  AND  EGYPT. 

that  the  vine  was  cultivated  in  Egypt  from  a  time  long 
anterior  to  Moses.  The  fig  and  the  date-bearing  palm 
were  likewise  grown  for  the  sake  of  the  fruit,  grapes, 
figs,  and  dates  constituting  the  Egyptian  lord's  usual 
dessert,^  while  the  last-named  fruit  was  also  made  into 
a  conserve,^  which  diversified  the  diet  at  rich  men's 
tables. 

The  breeding  and  rearing  of  cattle  was  a  regular 
part  of  the  farmer's  business  in  Egypt,  and  the  wealth 
of  individuals  in  flocks  and  herds  was  considerable. 
Three  distinct  kinds  of  cattle  were  affected — the  long- 
horned,  the  short-horned,  and  the  hornless.^  "  During 
the  greater  part  of  the  year  they  were  pastured  in 
open  fields,  on  the  natural  growth  of  the  rich  soil,  or 
on  artificial  grasses,  which  were  cultivated  for  the 
purpose ;  but  at  the  time  of  the  inundation  it  was 
necessary  to  bring  them  in  from  the  fields  to  the  farm- 
yards or  the  villages,  where  they  were  kept  in  sheds 
or  pens  on  ground  artificially  raised,  so  as  to  be 
beyond  the  reach  of  the  river."*  Thus  the  cattle 
generally  had  "  houses  "  (Exod.  ix.  20),  i.  e.,  sheds  or 
stalls,  into  which  it  was  possible  to  bring  them  at 
short  notice. 

Among  "  miscellaneous  customs "  the  following 
seem  most  worthy  of  notice :  {a)  the  practice  of 
making  boats  out  of  bulrushes  (ch.  ii.  3  ;  compare 
Isa.  xviii.  2),  and  {b)  the  position  occupied  by  magic 

1  Birch,  "  Egypt  from  the  Earliest  Times,"  p.  45. 

2  Wilkinson,  "Ancient  Egyptians,"  vol.  ii.,  p.  43.  *''  Ibid. 
*Rawlinson,  "History  of  Ancient  Eg>'pt,"  vol.  i.,  pp.  171,  172, 


NOTICES  IN  EXODUS.  249 

at  the  court  of  the  Pharaohs.  On  the  former  point 
Sir  Gardner  Wilkinson  remarks^:  "There  was  a  small 
kind  of  punt  or  canoe  made  entirely  of  the  papyrus, 
bound  together  with  bands  of  the  same  plant — the 
*  vessels  of  bulrushes  '  mentioned  in  Isa.  xviii.  2."  On 
the  latter  M.  Maspero  makes  the  following  statement^: 
"  Magic  was  in  Egypt  a  science,  and  the  magician  one 
of  the  most  esteemed  of  learned  men.  The  nobles 
themselves,  the  prince  Khamuas  and  his  brother,  were 
adepts  in  supernatural  arts,  and  decipherers  of  magic 
formularies,  in  which  they  had  an  entire  belief  A 
prince  who  was  a  sorcerer  would  nowadays  inspire  a 
very  moderate  sentiment  of  esteem.  In  Egypt  the 
profession  of  magic  was  not  incompatible  with  royalty, 
and  the  sorcerers  of  a  Pharaoh  had  not  uncommonly 
the  Pharaoh  himself  for  their  pupil."  The  magical 
texts  form  a  considerable  proportion  of  the  MSS. 
which  have  come  down  to  us  from  ancient  times,  par- 
ticularly from  the  nineteenth  dynasty;  and  the  com- 
position of  some  of  them  was  ascribed  to  a  Divine 
source. 

'  In  Rawlinson's  "  Herodotus,"  vol.  ii.,  p.  154,  note. 
2 Quoted  by  M.  Lenormant,  "Manuel  d'Histoiie  Ancienne,"  vol.  ii., 
pp.  126-7. 


CHAPTER   XIX. 

NOTICES    OF    EGYPT    IN    THE    FIRST  BOOK  OF  KINGS. 

It  is,  at  first  sight,  surprising  that  there  is  no  mention 
of  Egypt  in  connection  with  the  history  of  the  Israel- 
ites between  the  Exodus  and  the  reign  of  Solomon. 
The  interval  is  one  of,  at  least,  three  hundred — per- 
haps of  four  hundred — years.  During  its  earlier 
portion,  and  again  about  a  century  before  its  close,  the 
Egyptian  monarchs  conducted  expeditions  into  North- 
ern Syria,  if  not  even  into  Mesopotamia,  which  might 
have  been  expected  to  have  brought  them,  into  contact 
with  the  Hebrew  people ;  but  the  Hebrew  records  of 
the  time  are  entirely  silent  on  the  subject,  and  indeed 
only  mention  Egypt  retrospectively,  as  the  place  where 
Israel  had  once  suffered  affliction.^  Perhaps  the  earlier 
expeditions — ^those  of  Rameses  1 11.^ — may  have  taken 
place  while  Israel  was  still  detained  in  the  "  Wilder- 
ness of  the  Wanderings,"  in  which  case  there  would 
naturally  have  been  no  collision  between  the  two 
peoples ;  while  those  of  Rameses  XII.^  and  of  Her- 

ijosh.i.  lo;  xxiv.  4-7,  14,  17;  i  Sam.ii.27;  vi.6;  x.i8;  xii.6-8. 
^Brugsch,  "History  of  Egypt,"  vol.  ii.,  p.  152. 
8  Ibid.,  vol.  ii.,  pp.  184-7 ;  Birch,  "  Egypt  from  the  Earliest  Times," 
pp.  149-153- 
250 


NOTICES  IN  THE  FIRST  BOOK  OF  KINGS.       251 

hor^  (about  B.C.  11 30-1 100),  having  Syria  rather  than 
Palestine  for  their  object,  may  have  been  conducted 
along  the  coast  route,  by  way  of  Philistia  and  Phoeni- 
cia, into  Coele-Syria,  and  so  have  left  the  Israelite 
territory  untouched,  or  nearly  untouched.  The  main 
explanation,  however,  of  the  disappearance  of  Egypt 
from  the  narrative,  is  to  be  found  in  her  general 
depression  and  weakness  during  the  period  in  ques- 
tion, which  prevented  any  real  conquests  from  being 
made,  or  any  large  armies  sent  into  Western  Asia,  as 
in  the  earlier  times  of  Thothmes  III.,  Amenhotep  IL, 
Seti,  and  Rameses  II.,  or  in  the  later  ones  of  Sheshonk 
and  Neku.  This  depression  is  very  marked  in  the 
Egyptian  remains,  which  show  no  really  great  or 
conquering  monarch  between  Rameses  III.  and  She- 
shonk I.  During  this  space,  which  is  that  of  the 
judges  and  first  two  kings  in  Israel,  Egypt  really 
ceased  to  be  an  aggressive  power. 

The  Scriptural  notices  of  Egypt  belonging  to  the 
reign  of  Solomon  are  the  following : — 

1.  "Solomon  made  affinity  with  Pharaoh,  king  of  Egypt,  and  took 
Pharaoh's  daughter,  and  brought  her  into  the  city  of  David." — i  Kings 
iii.  I. 

2.  "  Pharaoh,  king  of  Egypt,  had  gone  up  and  taken  Gezer,  and  burnt 
it  with  fire,  and  slain  the  Canaanites  that  dwelt  in  the  city,  and  given 
it  for  a  present  unto  his  daughter,  Solomon's  wife." — i  Kings  ix.  16. 

3.  «  Solomon  had  horses  brought  out  of  Egypt,  and  linen  yarn ;  the 
king's  merchants  received  the  linen  yarn  at  a  price.  And  a  chariot 
came  up  and  went  out  of  Egypt  for  six  hundred  shekels  of  silver,  and 
an   horse  for  a  hundred  and  fifty :    and  so  for  all  the  kings  of  the 

1  Birch,  p.  154. 


252  BAB  YL  ON  AND  E G  YPT. 

Hittites,  and  for  the  kings  of  Syria,  did  they  bring  them  out  by  their 
means." — i  Kings  x,  28,  29. 

4.  "  The  Lord  stirred  up  an  adversary  unto  Solomon,  Hadad  the 
Edomite :  he  was  of  the  king's  seed  in  Edom.  For  it  came  to  pass, 
when  David  was  in  Edom,  and  Joab,  the  captain  of  the  host,  was  gone 
up  to  bury  the  slain,  after  he  had  smitten  eveiy  male  in  Edom,  .  .  . 
that  Hadad  fled,  he  and  certain  Edomites  of  his  father's  servants  with 
him,  to  go  into  Egypt,  Hadad  being  yet  a  little  child ;  and  they  arose 
out  of  Midian,  and  came  to  Paran ;  and  they  took  men  with  them  out 
of  Paran,  and  they  came  to  Egypt,  unto  Pharaoh,  king  of  Egypt,  which 
gave  him  an  house,  and  appointed  him  victuals,  and  gave  him  land. 
And  Hadad  found  great  favour  in  the  sight  of  Pharaoh,  so  that  he  gave 
him  to  wife  the  sister  of  his  own  wife,  the  sister  of  Tahpenes  the  queen ; 
and  the  sister  of  Tahpenes  bare  him  Genubath,  his  son,  whom  Tahpenes 
weaned  in  Pharaoh's  house :  and  Genubath  was  in  Pharaoh's  house- 
hold, among  the  sons  of  Pharaoh." — i  Kings  xi.  14-20. 

5.  "  Solomon  sought  to  kill  Jeroboam.  And  Jeroboam  arose  and 
fled  into  Egypt,  unto  Shishak,  .  .  .  unto  the  death  of  Solomon." — i 
Kings  xi.  40. 

There  is  nothing  surprising  in  the  willingness  of  a 
Pharaoh  of  the  twenty-first  dynasty  to  give  a  daughter 
in  marriage  to  the  foreign  monarch  of  a  neighbouring 
country.  Even  in  the  most  flourishing  times  the 
kings  of  Egypt  had  been  willing  to  form  matrimonial 
alliances  with  the  Ethiopian  royal  house,  and  had  both 
taken  Ethiopian  princesses  for  their  own  wives'  and 
given  their  daughters  in  marriage  to  Ethiopian  mon- 
archs.  The  last  king  of  the  twentieth  dynasty  married 
a  "  princess  of  Baktan  "  ^ — a  Syrian  or  Mesopotamian ; 
and    even    the    great    Rameses    married    a    Hittite.^ 

^  Birch,  "  Egypt  from  the  Earliest  Times,"  pp.  81,  107,  etc. 

2  "  Records  of  the  Past,"  vol.  iv.,  p.  57. 

*Lenormant,  "Manuel  d'Histoire  Ancienne,"  vol.  ii.,  p.  264. 


NOTICES  IN  THE  FIRST  BOOK  OF  KINGS.       253 


According  to  i  Chron.  iv.  18,  there  was  one  Pharaoh 
who  allowed  a  daughter  of  his  to  marry  a  mere  ordi- 
nary Israelite.  To  "  make  affinity "  with  a  prince 
of  Solomon's  rank  and  position  would  have  been 
beneath  the  dignity  of  few  Egyptian  monarchs ;  it 
was  probably  felt  as  a  highly  satisfactory  connection 
by  the  weak  Tanite  prince  whose  daughter  made  so 
good  a  match. 

With  which  of  the  Tanite  monarchs  it  was  that 
Solomon  thus  allied  himself  is  uncertain.  M.  Lenor- 
mant  fixes  definitely  on  Hor-Pasebensha/  or  Pase- 
bensha  II.,  the  last  king  of  the  dynasty;  but  an  earlier 
monarch  is  more  probable.  Solomon's  marriage  was 
early  in  his  reign  (i  Kings  iii.  i),  and  he  reigned  forty 
years  (ch.  xi.  42),  during  the  last  five  or  ten  of  which 
he  would  seem  to  have  been  contemporaiy  with 
Shishak  (ch.  xi.  40).  When  he  ascended  the  throne, 
the  king  who  reigned  in  Egypt  was  probably  either 
Pasebensha  I.  or  Pinetem  11.  Unfortunately  these 
monarchs  have  left  such  scanty  remains,  that  we  know 
next  to  nothing  concerning  them. 

The  conquest  of  Gezer  by  this  Pharaoh,  whoever  he 
was,  and  its  transference  to  Solomon  as  his  wife's 
dowry  (ch.  ix.  16),  though  it  cannot  be  confirmed 
from  Egyptian  history,  may  be  illustrated  from 
Assyrian.  Sargon  tells  us  in  one  of  his  inscriptions 
that,  having  conquered  the  country  of  Cilicia  with 
some  difficulty,  on  account  of  its  great  natural 
strength,  he  made  it  over  to  Ambris,  king  of  Tubal, 
'  Lenonnant,  "Manuel  d'Histoire  Ancienne,"  vol.  ii.,  p.  329. 


254 


BAB  YL  ON  AND  E  G  YPT. 


who  had  married  one  of  his  daughters,  as  the  prin- 
cess's dowry.^ 

The  establishment  of  commercial  relations  between 
Palestine  and  Syria  on  the  one  hand  and  Egypt  on  the 
other  (ch.  x.  28,  29)  is  exactly  what  might  have  been 
expected  to  follow  on  the  matrimonial  alliance  con- 
cluded between  Solomon  and  his  Egyptian  contem- 
porary. When  Rameses  II.  allied  himself  with  the 
Hittite  royal  house,  interchange  of  commodities 
between  Egypt  and  Syria  is  the  immediate  conse- 
quence. Corn  is  sent  by  sea  from  the  valley  of  the 
Nile  to  the  Syrian  mountain  tract  for  the  support  of 
the  "  children  of  Heth,"  ^  who  doubtless  made  a  return 
in  timber,  or  some  other  products  of  their  own  soil. 
In  Solomon's  time  the  Egyptian  commodities  imported 
by  the  Western  Asiatics  were  different.  Long  practice 
had  perfected  in  Egypt  the  manufacture  of  chariots, 
and  these  had  become  indispensable  to  the  Hittite  and 
Syrian  kings  for  the  maintenance  of  their  independ- 
ence against  the  encroachments  of  Assyria.  Each 
king  of  these  peoples — and  there  were  several  kings 
of  each^^ — maintained  a  war  force  of  several  hundred 
chariots,^  for  each  of  which  were  needed  two  well- 
trained  horses.  These  Egypt  supplied,  together  (if 
our   translators   are  right)  with  "  linen  yarn,"  also  a 

^  "Ancient  Monarchies,"  vol.  ii.,  p.  150,  note  6. 
2 "  Records  of  the  Past,"  vol,  iv.,  p.  43,  1.  24. 

^  See  2  Sam.  viii.  3-12;  x.  6-1 6;  i  Kings  x.  29;  2  Kings  vii.  6;  and 
the  Assyrian  inscriptions  passim. 

*  "  Ancient  Monarchies,"  vol,  ii.,  p.  103,  note  7. 


NOTICES  IN  THE  FIRST  BOOK  OF  KINGS.       255 

commodity  known  to  have  been  produced  largely  in 
that  country.' 

The  story  of  Hadad's  flight  to  Egypt  and  hospitable 
reception  by  an  Egyptian  Pharaoh,  whose  queen's 
name  was  Tahpenes,  admits  of  no  illustration  from 
profane  sources.  We  do  not  know  the  names  borne 
by  the  queens  of  the  later  monarchs  of  the  twenty- 
first  dynasty,  and  we  have  thus  no  means  of  identifying 
the  Pharaoh  intended.  No  doubt  Egypt  was  at  all 
times  open  as  a  refuge  to  political  exiles ;  but  there 
must  have  been  special  reasons  for  the  high  favour 
shown  to  Hadad.  Perhaps  he  was  already  connected 
by  blood  with  the  Tanite  monarchs ;  perhaps  Edom 
had  been  in  alliance  with  Egypt  before  David  con- 
quered it. 

Jeroboam's  flight  to  Shishak  brings  before  us  an 
Egyptian  monarch  who  is  fortunately  unmistakable. 
Hitherto  the  sacred  writers  have  been  content,  when 
mentioning  Egyptian  kings,  to  speak  of  them  by  their 
recognised  official  title  of  "  Pharaoh."  ^  Now  for  the 
first  time  is  this  habit  broken  through,  and  the  actual 
proper  name  of  an  Egyptian  monarch  presented  to  us. 
The  Hebrew  Shishak  {^^^"^^  represents  almost  exactly 
the  Egyptian  name  ordinarily  written  "  Sheshenk," 
but  sometimes  "  Sheshek,"^and  expressed  in  the  frag- 
ments of  Manetho  by  Sesonchis  (  JsV^y^-^t?).*     This  is 

1  Herod,  ii.  37,  182;  iii.  47;  Plin.,  "  H.  N."  xix.  i. 

2  See  above,  ch.  xiii. 

3  Lepsius,  "  Ueber  die  XXII.  iEgyptische  Konigs  dynastie,"  pp.  267, 
289. 

*  Syncellus,  "  Chronographia,"  pp.  73D,  74D. 


256  BAB  YL ON  AND  EG  YPT. 

a  name  well  known  to  Egyptologists.  Wholly  absent 
from  all  the  earlier  Egyptian  monuments,  it  appears 
suddenly  in  those  of  the  twenty-second  (Bubastite) 
dynasty,  where  it  is  borne  by  no  less  than  four  mon- 
archs,  besides  occurring  also  among  the  names  of 
private  individuals.  This  abundance  would  be  some- 
what puzzling  were  it  not  for  the  fact  that  one  only  of 
the  four  monarchs  is  a  warrior,  or  leads  any  expedition 
beyond  the  borders.^  The  records  of  the  time  leave 
no  doubt  that  the  prince  who  received  Jeroboam  was 
Sheshonk  I.,  the  founder  of  the  Bubastite  line,  the  son 
of  Namrot  and  Tentespeh,  the  first  king  of  the  twenty- 
second  dynasty. 

"  It  came  to  pass  in  the  fifth  year  of  King  Rehoboam  that  Shishak, 
king  of  Egypt,  came  up  against  Jerusalem ;  and  he  took  away  the 
treasures  of  the  house  of  the  Lord,  and  the  treasures  of  the  king's 
house ;  he  even  took  away  all ;  and  he  took  away  all  the  shields  of  gold 
which  Solomon  had  made." — I  Kings  xiv.  25,  26, 

With  this  may  be  compared  2  Chron.  xii.  1-9 : — 

"  And  it  came  to  pass,  when  Rehoboam  had  established  the  king- 
dom, and  had  strengthened  himself,  he  forsook  the  law  of  the  Lord, 
and  all  Israel  with  him;  and  it  came  to  pass,  that  in  the  fifth  year  of 
King  Rehoboam  Shishak,  king  of  Egypt,  came  up  against  Jerusalem, 
because  they  had  transgi'essed  against  the  Lord,  with  twelve  hundred 
chariots  and  threescore  thousand  horsemen;  and  the  people  were 
without  number  that  came  with  him  out  of  Egypt — the  Lubims,  and 
the  Sukkiims,  and  the  Ethiopians.  And  he  took  the  fenced  cities  which 
pertained  to  Judah,  and  came  to  Jerusalem.  Then  came  Shemaiah  the 
prophet  to  Rehoboam,  and  to  the  princes  of  Judah  that  were  gathered 
together  to  Jerusalem  because  of  Shishak,  and  said  unto  them.  Thus  saith 

^  Lenormant,  "  Manuel  d'Histoire  Ancienne,"  vol.  ii.,  p.  340. 


NOTICES  IN  THE  FIRST  BOOK  OF  KINGS.        257 

the  Lord,  Ye  have  forsaken  Me,  and  therefore  also  have  I  left  you  in 
the  hand  of  Shishak.  Whereupon  the  princes  of  Israel  and  the  king 
humbled  themselves,  and  they  said,  The  Lord  is  righteous.  And  when 
the  Lord  saw  that  they  humbled  themselves,  the  word  of  the  Lord 
came  to  Shemaiah,  saying,  They  have  humified  themselves ;  therefore 
I  will  not  destroy  them,  but  I  will  grant  them  some  deliverance ;  and 
My  wrath  shall  not  be  poured  out  upon  Jerusalem  by  the  hand  of 
Shishak.  Ncvef-theless  they  shall  be  his  sei-vants,  that  they  may  know 
My  service  and  the  service  of  the  kingdoms  of  the  countries.  So 
Shishak,  king  of  Eg>'pt,  came  up  against  Jerusalem,  and  took  away 
the  treasures  of  the  house  of  the  Lord,  and  the  treasures  of  the 
king's  house ;  he  took  all ;  he  earned  away  also  the  shields  of  gold 
which  Solomon  had  made." 

The  Palestinian  expedition  of  Sheshonk  I.  forms 
the  subject  of  a  remarkable  bas-relief/  which,  on  his 
return  from  it,  he  caused  to  be  executed  in  commem- 
oration of  its  complete  success.  Selecting  the  Great 
Temple  of  Karnak,  at  Thebes,  which  Seti  I.  and 
Rameses  II.  had  already  adorned  profusely  with 
representations  of  their  victories,  he  built  against  its 
southern  external  wall  a  fresh  portico  or  colonnade, 
known  to  Egyptologists  as  "the  portico  of  the  Bubas- 
tites,"  and  carved  upon  the  wall  itself,  to  the  east  of 
his  portico,  a  memorial  of  his  grand  campaign.  First, 
he  represented  himself  in  his  war  costume,  holding  by 
the  hair  of  their  heads  with  his  left  hand  thirty-eight 
captive  Asiatic  chiefs,  and  with  an  iron  mace  uplifted 
in  his  right  threatening  them  with  destruction. 
Further,  he  caused  himself  to  be  figured  a  second 
time,  and  represented  in  the  act  of  leading  captive  a 

ipor  a  representation  of  this  monument,  see  the  "  Denkmaler  "  of 
Lepsius,  part  iii.,  pis.  252  and  253  a. 
17 


258  BA B YL ON  AND  EGYPT. 

hundred  and  thirty-three  cities  or  tribes,  each  specified 
by  name  and  personfied  in  an  individual  form,  accom- 
panied by  a  cartouche  containing  their  respective 
names.  In  the  physiognomies  of  these  ideal  figures 
the  critical  acumen  or  lively  imagination  of  a  French 
historian  sees  rendered  "  with  marvellous  ethnographic 
exactness  "  the  Jewish  type  of  countenance  ;^  but  less 
gifted  travellers  do  not  find  anything  very  peculiar  in 
the  profiles,  which,  whether  representing  Jews  or 
Arabs,  are  almost  exactly  alike. 

The  list  of  names  contained  in  the  record  is  very 
much  more  interesting  than  the  array  of  counte- 
nances accompanying  them.  They  have  been  carefully 
transcribed,  and  compared  with  those  which  occur  in 
the  Hebrew  Scriptures,  both  by  Mr.  Reginald  Stuart 
Poole  ^  and  by  Dr.  Brugsch.^  It  results  from  the 
comparison,  first,  that  of  the  ninety  names  which  are 
legible  about  forty  or  forty-five  may  be  pretty  certainly 
identified  either  with  Palestinian  towns  or  districts  or 
with  Arab  tribes  of  the  neighbourhood ;  secondly, 
that  the  Arab  tribe  names  are  in  several  instances 
repeated ;  and  thirdly,  that  the  Palestinian  town  names 
are  divisible  into  three  classes :  {a)  cities  of  Judah 
proper,  (8)  Levitical  cities  within  the  limits  of  the 
kingdom  of  Israel,  and  ic)  Canaanite  cities  within  the 
same  limits.    To  the  first  class  belong  Adoraim  (called 

^  Lenormant,  "  Manuel  d'Histoire  Ancienne,"  vol.  ii.,  p.  340. 
^  See  the  article  on  Shishak  in  Smith's  *'  Dictionary  of  the  Bible," 
vol.  iii. 

••  "  Geschichte  /Eg}'pten.s  unter  den  Pharaonen,"  pp.  660-662. 


NOTICES  IN  THE  FIRST  BOOK  OF  KINGS.       259 

Adurma),  Aijalon  (called  Ayulon),  and  Shoco  (called 
Shauke),  which  were  among  the  "  fenced  cities  "  that 
Rehoboam  fortified  in  anticipation  of  Sheshonk's 
attack  (2  Chron.  xi.  5-10);  also  Gibeon  (Kebeana), 
Alemeth  (Beith-'almoth),  Beth-Tappuah  (Beith-Ta- 
puh),  Telem  (Zalema),  Azem  (Aauzamaa),  and  Lebaoth 
(Libith).  To  the  second  class  may  be  assigned  Taa- 
nach  (Ta'ankau),  mentioned  as  a  Levitical  city  in  Josh, 
xxi.  25  ;  Rehob  (Rehabau),  mentioned  in  Josh.  xxi. 
31  and  I  Chron.  vi.  75;  Mahanaim  (Mahunema),  men- 
tioned Josh.  xxi.  38,  I  Chron.  vi.  80;  Beth-horon 
(Beith-Huaron),  mentioned  Josh.  xxi.  22,  i  Chron.  vi. 
68  ;  Kedemoth  (Kademoth),  mentioned  Josh.  xxi.  37, 
I  Chron.  vi.  79 ;  Bileam  (Bilema),  mentioned  i  Chron. 
vi.  70;  Golan  (Galenaa),  mentioned  Josh.  xxi.  27,  i 
Chron.  vi.  71  ;  and  Anem  (Anama),  mentioned  in  i 
Chron.  vi.  73.  As  belonging  to  the  third  class  we  can 
only  fix  positively  on  Beth-shan  (Beith-shan-ra)  and 
Megiddo  (Maketu) ;  but  Rabbith,  Shunem,  Hapha- 
raim,  and  Edrei,  which  are  also  contained  in  Shes- 
honk's list  of  his  conquests,  may  be  suspected  of  having 
retained  a  Canaanite  element  in  their  population. 

This  list  is  remarkable  both  for  what  it  contains  and 
for  what  it  omits.  The  omission  of  most  of  those 
strongholds  towards  the  south,  which  Rehoboam  forti- 
fied against  Egypt,  as  Hebron,  Lachish,  Azekah, 
Mareshah,  Gath,  Adullam,  Bethzur,  and  Tekoa  (2 
Chron.  xi.  6-10),  is  perhaps  to  be  explained  by  the 
illegibility  of  twelve  names  at  the  beginning  of  the  list, 
where  these  cities,  as  the  first  attacked,  would  most 


26o  BAB YL ON  AND  EGYPT. 

probably  have  been  mentioned.  The  omission  of 
Jerusalem  might  also  be  accounted  for  in  the  same  way. 
Or  the  fact  may  have  been  that  Jerusalem  itself  was 
not  taken.  Like  Hezekiah,  on  the  first  invasion  of 
Sennacherib  (2  Kings  xviii.  13-16),  Rehoboam  may 
have  surrendered  his  treasures  (i  Kings  xiv.  26)  to 
save  his  city  from  the  horrors  of  capture.  This  was, 
perhaps,  the  fulfilment  of  God's  promise  by  the  mouth 
of  Shemaiah — 'M  will  grant  them  some  deliverance, 
and  My  wrath  shall  not  be  poured  upon  Jerusalem 
by  the  hand  of  Shishak "  (2  Chron.  xii.  7).  The 
Egyptian  monarch,  on  receiving  the  treasures  and  the 
submission  of  Rehoboam  (ibid.  ver.  8),  may  have  con- 
sented to  respect  the  city. 

But,  as  he  could  not  mention  Jerusalem  among  his 
actual  conquests,  he  supplied  the  place  where  the 
name  would  naturally  have  occurred  with  an  inscrip- 
tion of  a  peculiar  kind.  The  cartouche  borne  by  one 
of  the  earlier  of  the  ideal  figures  contains  the  epigraph 
"  YUTeH  MALeK,"  in  which  Egyptologists  generally 
recognise  a  boast  either  that  the  "  king  "  or  the  "  king- 
dom of  Judah  "  made  submission  to  the  conqueror. 
"  Yuteh  Malek  "  is,  we  think,  most  properly  read  as 
"  Judah,  a  kingdom."  By  introducing  the  words, 
Sheshonk  wished  to  mark  that  besides  subduing  cities 
and  districts  and  tribes,  he  had  in  one  case  conquered 
a  country  which  was  under  the  government  of  a  king. 

The  fact  that  a  large  proportion  of  the  towns  men- 
tioned as  taken  are  in  the  territories  not  of  Rehoboam, 
against  whom  Sheshonk  "  went  up  "  (i  Kings  xiv.  25), 


NOTICES  IN  THE  FIRST  BOOK  OF  KINGS.        261 

but  of  Jeroboam,  his  protege  and  friend,  whom  his 
expedition  was  doubtless  intended  to  assist,  and  the 
further  fact  that  these  towns  were  chiefly  Levitical  or 
Canaanite,  would  seem  to  show  that  Jeroboam,  in 
the  earlier  part  of  his  reign,  had  considerable  opposi- 
tion to  encounter  within  the  limits  of  his  own  king- 
dom. The  disaffection  of  those  Levites  whose  posses- 
sions lay  within  his  territories  is  sufficiently  indicated 
in  Chronicles  by  the  account  which  is  there  given  (2 
Chron.  xi.  13,  14)  of  a  number  of  them  leaving  their 
possessions  and  "  resorting  to  Rehoboam  throughout 
all  their  coasts."  It  is  probable  that  such  as  remained 
were  equally  hostile,  and  that  Jeroboam  used  the 
arms  of  his  ally  to  punish  them.  At  the  same  time, 
he  was  enabled  by  Egyptian  aid  to  reduce  a  few 
Canaanite  cities  which  still  maintained  their  inde- 
pendence, as  Gezer  had  done  until  conquered  by  the 
Pharaoh  who  gave  his  daughter  to  Solomon  (2  Kings 
ix.  16). 

The  army  with  which  Sheshonk  invaded  Palestine 
is  more  numerous  than  we  should  have  anticipated, 
and  some  corruption  in  the  numbers  maybe  suspected. 
It  is  composed,  hov/ever,  exactly  as  the  monuments 
would  have  led  us  to  expect,  almost  wholly  of  foreign 
mercenaries  (2  Chron.  xii.  3),  Libyans,  Ethiopians,  and 
others.  The  Egyptian  armies  at  this  time  consisted, 
for  the  most  part,  of  Maxyes  and  other  Berber  tribes 
from  the  north-west,  and  of  Ethiopians  and  negroes 
from   the    south.^     Sheshonk,   who   was    himself   of 

1  Lenormant,  "  Manuel  d'Histoire  Ancienne,"  vol.  ii.,  pp.  340,  341. 


262  BAB YL ON  A ND  EGYPT. 


foreign  descent,  placed  far  more  dependence  on  these 
foreign  troops  than  on  the  native  Egyptian  levies. 

"  Asa  had  an  army  of  men  that  bare  targets  and  spears.  ,  .  .  And 
there  came  out  against  them  Zerah  the  Ethiopian  with  an  host  of  a 
thousand  thousand  and  three  hundred  chariots,  and  came  unto  Mare- 
shah.  Then  Asa  went  out  against  him,  and  they  set  the  battle  in  aiTay 
in  the  valley  of  Zephathah  at  Mareshah.  And  Asa  cried  unto  the 
Lord,  .  .  .  and  the  Lord  smote  the  Ethiopians  before  Asa  and  before 
Judah,  and  the  Ethiopians  fled.  And  Asa  and  the  people  that  were 
with  him  pursued  them  unto  Gerar ;  and  the  Ethiopians  were  over- 
thrown, that  they  could  not  recover  themselves."— 2  Chron.  xiv.  9-13. 

The  Egyptians  do  not  record  unsuccessful  expedi- 
tions, and  thus  the  monuments  contain  no  mention  of 
this  attack  on  Asa.  It  appears  to  have  been  provoked 
by  Asa's  rebellion,  which  is  glanced  at  in  2  Chron. 
xiv.  6.  The  Egyptian  monarch  who  sent  or  led  the 
expedition  was  probably  Osorchon  (Uasarkan)  II., 
whose  name  the  Hebrews  contracted  into  Zerach 
(n!)T).  He  was,  perhaps,  an  Ethiopian  on  his  mother's 
side.  Asa's  defeat  of  his  vast  army  is  the  most 
glorious  victory  ever  obtained  by  an  Israelite  monarch, 
and  secured  his  country  from  any  Egyptian  attack  for 
above  three  centuries. 


CHAPTER   XX. 

NOTICES  OF  EGYPT  IN  THE  SECOND  BOOK  OF  KINGS. 

"  In  the  twelfth  year  of  Ahaz,  king  of  Judah,  began  Hoshea,the  son 
of  Elah,  to  reign  in  Samaria.  .  .  .  Against  him  came  up  Shalmaneser, 
king  of  Assyria;  and  Hoshea  became  his  servant,  and  gave  him 
presents.  And  the  king  of  Assyria  found  conspiracy  in  Hoshea,  for  he 
had  sent  messengers  to  So,  king  of  Egypt,  and  brought  no  present  to 
the  king  of  Assyria,  as  he  had  done  year  by  year;  therefore  the  king 
of  Assyria  shut  him  up,  and  bound  him  in  prison." — 2  Kings  xvii.  1-4. 

It  is  not  very  easy  to  identify  the  "  king  of  Egypt " 
here  mentioned,  as  one  with  whom  Hoshea.  the  son 
of  Elah,  sought  to  ally  himself,  with  any  of  the  known 
Pharaohs.     "  So  "  is  a  name  that  seems  at  first  sight 
very  unlike  those  borne  by  Egyptian  monarchs,  which 
are   never  monosyllabic,  and   in  no   case  end  in  the 
letter  0.    A  reference  to  the  Hebrew  text  removes,  how- 
ever, much  of  the  difficulty,  since  the  word  rendered  by 
''So"  in  our  version  is  found  to  be  one  of  three  letters, 
«1D,  all  of  which  may  be  consonants.     As  the  Maso- 
retic  pointing,  which  our  translators    followed,  is  of 
small  authority,  and  in  proper  names  of  scarcely  any 
authority  at  all,  we  are  entitled  to  give  to  each  of  the 
three  letters  its  consonant  force,  and,  supplying  short 
vowels,  to  render  the  Hebrew  i<^D  by  ''  Seveh."     Now 
"  Seveh "   is  very  near  jndeed   to   the    Manethonian 

263 


264  ^^^  yL ON  AND  EG  YP T. 

"  Sevech-us,"  whom  the  Sebennytic  priest  makes  the 
second  monarch  of  his  twenty-fifth  dynasty;  and 
"  Sevech-us "  is  a  natural  Greek  equivalent  of  the 
Egyptian  *'  Shebek  "  or  "  Shabak,"  a  name  borne  by  a 
well-known  Pharaoh  (the  first  king  of  the  same 
dynasty),  which  both  Herodotus  and  Manetho  render 
by  **  Sabacos."  It  has  been  generally  allowed  that  So 
(or  Seveh)  must  represent  one  or  other  of  these,  but 
critics  are  not  yet  agreed  which  is  to  be  preferred  of 
the  two.^  To  us  it  seems  that  both  the  name  itself 
and  the  necessities  of  the  chronology  point  to  the  first 
king  rather  than  to  the  second ;  and  we  consequently 
regard  Hoshea  as  having  turned  in  his  distress  to 
seek  the  aid  of  the  monarch  whom  the  Egyptians 
knew  as  Shabak,  and  the  Greeks  as  Sabacos  or  Sabaco.^ 
The  application  implies  an  entire  change  in  the 
condition  of  political  affairs  in  the  East,  and  in  the 
relations  of  state  to  state,  from  those  which  prevailed 
when  Egyptian  monarchs  last  figured  in  the  sacred 
narrative,  two  hundred  or  two  hundred  and  fifty  years 
earlier.  Then  Egypt  was  an  aggressive  power,  bent 
on  establishing  her  influence  over  Palestine,  and  from 
time  to  time  invading  Asia  with  large  armies  in  the 
hope  of  making  extensive  conquests.^  She  was  the 
chief  enemy  feared  by  the  petty  kingdoms  and  loosely 
aggregated   tribes  of   South-western    Asia,  the    only 

'  The  general  opinion  is  in  favour  of  Shabak ;  but  some,  like  Hekek- 
yan  Bey  ("Chronology  of  Siriadic  Monuments,"  p.  io6),  prefer 
Shabatok. 

^Ilerod.  ii.  139;  Manetho  ap,  Syncell.  "Chronograph.,"  p.  74,  B. 

'2Chron.  xii.  3;  xiv.  9. 


NOTICES  IN  THE  SECOND  BOOK  OF  KINGS.     265 

power  in  their  neighbourhood  that  possessed  large 
bodies  of  discipHned  troops  and  an  instinct  of  self- 
aggrandisement.  But  all  this  was  now  altered. 
Egypt,  from  the  time  of  Osarkon  II.,  had  steadily 
declined  in  strength ;  her  monarchs  had  been  inactive 
and  unwarlike,  her  policy  one  of  abstention  from  all 
enterprise.  The  inveterate  evil  of  disintegration  with 
which  her  ill-shaped  territory  was  naturally  threat- 
ened, and  which  had  from  time  to  time  shown  itself  in 
her  history,  once  more  made  its  appearance.  There 
arose  a  practice  of  giving  appanages  to  the  princes 
of  the  royal  house,  which  tended  to  become  hereditary, 
and  trenched  on  the  sovereignty  of  the  nominal  mon- 
arch. "  Egypt  found  herself  divided  into  a  certain 
number  of  principalities,  some  of  which  contained 
only  a  few  towns,  while  others  extended  over  several 
adjacent  cantons.  Ere  long  the  chiefs  of  these  prin- 
cipalities were  bold  enough  to  reject  the  suzerainty 
of  the  Pharaoh  ;  relying  upon  their  bands  of  Libyan 
mercenaries,  they  not  only  usurped  the  functions  of 
royalty,  but  even  the  title  of  king,  while  the  legitimate 
reigning  house,  relegated  to  a  corner  of  the  Delta, 
with  difficulty  preserved  a  remnant  of  its  old  autho- 
rity." ^  By  the  close  of  the  twenty-second  dynasty, 
"  Egypt  had  arrived  at  such  a  point  of  disintegration 
as  to  find  herself  portioned  out  among  nearly  twenty 
princes,  of  whom  four  at  least  assumed  the  cartouche 
and  the  other  emblems  of  royalty."  ^ 

^Lenormant,  "Manuel  d'Histoire  Ancienne,"  vol,  ii.,  p.  341. 
2  Ibid.,  p.  342. 


266  BAB YL ON  AND  EGYPT. 

Meanwhile,  as  if  to  counterbalance  the  paralysis 
and  discrepitude  of  the  Egyptian  state,  there  had 
arisen  on  the  other  side  of  Syria  and  Palestine  a  great 
power,  continually  increasing  in  strength,  with  the 
same  instinct  of  aggrandisement  which  had  formerly 
possessed  Egypt,  and  with  even  greater  aptitudes  for 
war  and  conquest.  Assyria,  from  about  b.  c.  880,  or  a 
little  earlier,  began  to  press  westward  upon  the  nations 
dwelling  between  the  Euphrates  and  the  Mediterra- 
nean, and  to  threaten  them  with  subjugation.  Asshur- 
nazir-pal  took  Carchemish,  conquered  Northern  Syria, 
and  forced  the  Phoenician  cities  to  make  their  submis- 
sion to  him.^  His  son,  Shalmaneser  II.,  engaged  in 
wars  with  Hamath,  Damascus,  and  Samaria;  defeated 
Benhadad,  Hazael,  and  Ahab ;  and  made  Jehu  take 
up  the  position  of  a  tributary.^  The  successors  of 
these  two  warlike  princes  '*  fairly  maintained  the 
empire  which  they  had  received,"  ^  and  even  pushed 
their  expeditions  into  Philistia  and  Edom.  After  a 
lull  in  the  war-storm,  which  lasted  from  about  B.C. 
780  to  750,  it  recommenced  with  increased  fury. 
Tiglath-Pileser  II.  crushed  the  kingdom  of  Damascus, 
and  greatly  crippled  that  of  Samaria,  besides  which  he 
reduced  the  Philistines  and  several  tribes  of  Arabs. 
He  was  succeeded  by  Shalmaneser  IV.,  the  monarch 
mentioned  in  2  Kings  xvii.  3. 

The  situation  was  thus  the  following.     The  petty 

^"Ancient  Monarchies,"  vol.  ii.,  pp.  88,  89. 

2  Ibid.,  pp.  102-106. 

2  Sayce,  "  Ancient  Empires  of  the  East,"  p.  375. 


NOTICES  IN  THE  SECOND  BOOK  OF  KINGS.     267 

States  of  Palestine  and  Syria  had  been  suffering  from 
the  attacks  of  the  Assyrians  for  a  century  and  a  half 
One  after  another,  the  greater  part  of  them  had  suc- 
cumbed. First  they  were  made  tributaries  ;  then  they 
were  absorbed  into  the  conquering  state  and  became 
mere  provinces.  Hoshea  found  his  kingdom  threat- 
ened with  the  fate  which  had  befallen  so  many  others. 
He  had  the  courage  to  make  an  effort  to  save  it. 
Casting  an  anxious  glance  over  the  entire  political 
position,  he  thought  that  he  saw  in  the  Egyptian 
monarch  of  the  time  a  possible  deliverer.  For  there 
had  been  quite  recently  a  revolution  in  Egypt.  The 
weak  and  indolent  native  monarchs  had  been  thrust 
aside,  and  superseded  by  a  stronger  and  fiercer  foreign 
race  from  the  neighbouring  Ethiopia.  **  So,"  or 
Shabak,  was  one  of  these  foreigners,  and  wielded  the 
resources  of  two  countries,  his  adopted  and  his  native 
one.  It  was  reasonable  to  expect  that  he  would  see 
the  danger  which  menaced  Egypt  from  the  new 
masters  of  Western  Asia,  and  the  desirability  of  main- 
taining the  barrier  between  his  own  dominions  and  the 
Assyrian,  which  the  still  unconquered  tribes  and  king- 
doms of  Syria  and  Palestine  were  capable  of  constitut- 
ing. There  were  others  besides  Samaria  ripe  for 
revolt.^  It  would  have  been  a  wise  policy  on  the  part 
of  the  Egyptian  monarch  to  have  fomented  the  dis- 
affection, and  supported  with  his  full  force  the  move- 
ment in  favour  of  independence  which  was  in  progress. 

1  As  Tyre,  which  actually  revolted  a  year  or  two  later ;  and  Hamath, 
Arpad,  Simyra,  and  Damascus,  which  revolted  from  Sargon  in  B.C.  721. 


268  BAB YL ON  AND  EGYPT. 

Hoshea's  "  messengers,"  under  these  circumstances, 
sought  the  court  of  Shabak,  which  appears  to  have 
been  fixed  at  Memphis,  in  Lower  Egypt.^  It  would 
seem  that  they  were  received  with  favour,  and  that 
material  aid  was  promised,  since  Hoshea  almost 
immediately  broke  into  open  revolt  by  withholding 
the  tribute  due  to  his  Assyrian  suzerain.  With  the 
utmost  promptness  Shalmaneser  marched  against  him, 
seized  his  person,  and  carried  him  off  to  Nineveh. 
Shabak  made  no  effort  in  his  defence.  The  first 
attempt  of  the  people  of  God  to  "  call  to  Egypt " 
(Hos.  vii.  ii)  thus  proved  a  most  disastrous  failure: 
the  king,  who  had  "  trusted  upon  the  staff  of  the 
bruised  reed"  (2  Kings  xviii.  21),  was  ruined  by  his 
misplaced  confidence,  and  within  a  few  years  his 
capital  was  taken  (ibid.  ver.  6),  and  his  people  carried 
into  captivity  (ibid,). 

"And  Rabshakeh  said,  .  .  .  Speak  ye  now  to  Hezekiah,  Thus  saith 
the  great  king,  the  king  of  Assyria,  "What  confidence  is  this  wherein 
thou  trustest?  Thou  sayest — but  they  are  but  vain  words — I  have 
counsel  and  strength  for  the  war.  Now  on  whom  dost  thou  trust,  that 
thou  rebellest  against  me  ?  Now,  behold,  thou  trustest  upon  the  staff 
of  this  bruised  reed,  even  upon  Egypt,  on  which  if  a  man  lean,  it  will 
go  into  his  hand  and  pierce  it ;  so  is  Pharaoh,  king  of  Egypt  unto  all 
that  trust  on  him."  (ch.  xviii.  19-21). 

"When  he"  {i.e.  Sennacherib)  "heard  say  of  Tirhakah,  king  of 
Ethiopia,  Behold,  he  is  come  out  to  fight  against  thee,  he  sent  messen- 
gers again  to  Hezekiah,  saying,  Let  not  thy  God  in  whom  thou  trustest 
deceive  thee,  saying,  Jerusalem  shall  not  be  delivered  into  the  hand  of 
the  king  of  Assyria"  (ibid.,  vers.  9,  10). 

*  Rawlinson,  "  History  of  Ancient  Egypt,"  vol.  ii.,  p.  446. 


NOTICES  IN  THE  SECOND  BOOK  OF  KINGS.     269 

Another  act  in  the  drama  has  been  opened.  The 
kingdom  of  Samaria  having  been  conquered  and 
absorbed  by  the  terrible  Assyrians,  it  is  Judaea's  turn  to 
be  threatened  with  a  similar  fate.  Not  that  she  is  now 
threatened  for  the  first  time.  Before  Samaria  had 
fallen,  Ahaz,  the  father  of  Hezekiah,  placed  himself 
voluntarily  under  the  Assyrian  suzerainty,  consenting 
to  become  the  vassal  of  Tiglath-Pileser  (2  Kings  xvi. 
7-10).  Hezekiah  threw  off  the  Assyrian  yoke  (ch. 
xviii.  7) ;  but  it  was  reimposed  upon  him  first,  as  it 
would  seem,  by  Sargon,^  and  again  (about  B.C.  701) 
by  Sennacherib  (ibid.,  vers.  13-16).  The  Jewish  mon- 
arch was,  however,  at  no  time  a  submissive  or  willing 
vassal ;  and  he  had  no  sooner  bowed  his  neck  to  Sen- 
nacherib's yoke,  than  he  began  to  make  preparations 
for  recovering  his  independence.  Like  his  brother 
monarch  in  Samaria,  he  thought  that  he  saw  in  Egypt 
his  best  ally  and  protector.  We  may  gather  from 
Sennacherib's  reproaches  in  this  chapter,  as  well  as 
from  passages  in  the  prophecies  of  Isaiah,  that  a 
formal  embassy  was  sent  either  to  Tirhakah  at  Napata, 
or  to  his  representative  in  Lower  Egypt,  with  an  offer 
of  alliance  and  a  request  for  armed  assistance,  espe- 
cially chariots  and  horsemen  (ibid.,  vers.  23,  24).  As 
in  the  former  instance,  the  answer  received  was  favour- 
able. Tirhakah  was  an  enterprising  monarch  who 
left  a  name  behind  him  which  marks  him  as  one  of 

1  Sargon  claims  in  his  inscriptions  to  have  conquered  Jerusalem  (see 
Mr.  Cheyne's  "  Isaiah,"  vol.  i.,  p.  69).  Various  passages  of  Isaiah  are 
thought  to  have  reference  to  this  conquest. 


270  BAB  YL  ON  AND  EGYPT. 

the  greatest  of  Egypt's  later  kings.^  He  saw  the 
wisdom  of  upholding  the  independence  of  Judaea,  and, 
accepting  the  alliance  proffered  by  Hezekiah,  probably 
gave  an  assurance  of  help,  should  Sennacherib  attempt 
to  punish  his  revolted  vassal. 

The  occasion  for  fulfilling  his  promise  soon  arrived. 
Sennacherib,  in  b.  c.  700  or  699,  once  more  proceeded 
into  Palestine,^  and,  sending  a  general  to  frighten 
Hezekiah  into  submission  (ibid.,  ver.  17),  himself 
marched  on  towards  the  south.  He  had  received 
information  of  the  alliance  that  had  been  concluded 
between  Judaea  and  Egypt  (vers.  21,  24),  and  regard- 
ing Tirhakah  as  his  chief  enemy,  pressed  forward  to 
encounter  his  troops.  Tirhakah,  on  his  part,  remained 
faithful  to  his  ally,  and  put  his  army  in  motion  to  meet 
Sennacherib  (ch.  xix.  9). 

This  boldness  is  quite  in  accordance  with  Tir- 
hakah's  character.  He  was  an  enterprising  prince, 
engaged  in  many  wars,  and  a  determined  opponent  of 
the  Assyrians.  His  name  is  read  on  the  Egyptian 
monuments  as  Tahark  or  Tahrak  ;  and  his  face,  which 
appears  on  them,  is  expressive  of  strong  determina- 
tion. The  Assyrian  inscriptions  tell  us  that,  in  the 
later  part  of  his  life,  he  carried  on  a  war  for  many 
years  with  Esar-haddon  and  his  son,  Asshur-bani-pal.^ 

*  Megasthenes,  Fr.  80. 

'  M.  Lenormant  considers  that  the  embassy  of  Rabshakeh  and  de- 
struction of  Sennacherib's  host  fell  in  the  same  year  as  his  first  invasion 
("Manuel  d'Histoire  Ancienne,"  vol.  ii.,  p.  361);  but  it  seems  to  me 
more  probable  that  they  were  separated  by  a  short  interval. 

^G.  Smith,  "History  of  Asshur-bani-pal,"  pp.  15-47. 


NOTICES  IN  THE  SECOND  BOOK  OF  KINGS.     271 

If  his  star  ultimately  paled  before  that  of  the  latter,  it 
was  not  from  any  lack  of  courage,  or  resolution,  or 
good  faith  on  his  part.  He  struggled  gallantly 
against  the  Assyrian  power  for  above  thirty  years, 
was  never  wanting  to  his  confederates,  and,  if  he  did 
not  quite  deserve  the  high  eulogies  of  the  Greeks, 
was,  at  any  rate,  among  the  most  distinguished 
monarchs  of  his  race  and  period. 

"  In  his "  (Josiah's)  "  days  Pharaoh-Nechoh,  king  of  Egypt,  went 
up  against  the  king  of  Assyria  to  the  river  Euphrates ;  and  King  Josiah 
went  against  him ;  and  he  slew  him  at  Megiddo,  when  he  had  seen 
him,  .  .  .  And  the  people  of  the  land  took  Jehoahaz,  the  son  of  Josiah, 
and  anointed  him,  and  made  him  king  in  his  father's  stead.  .  .  .  And 
Pharaoh-Nechoh  put  him  in  bands  at  Riblah,  in  the  land  of  Hamath, 
that  he  might  not  reign  in  Jerusalem,  and  put  the  land  to  a  tribute  of  an 
hundred  talents  of  silver  and  a  talent  of  gold.  And  Pharaoh-Nechoh 
made  Eliakim,  the  son  of  Josiah,  king  in  the  room  of  Josiah  his  father, 
and  turned  his  name  to  Jehoiakim,  and  took  Jehoahaz  away ;  and  he 
came  to  Egypt,  and  died  there  "  (ch.  xxiii.  29-34). 

An  interval  of  ninety  years  separates  this  notice 
from  the  one  last  considered.  The  position  of  affairs 
is  once  more  completely  changed.  Although  the 
present  passage,  taken  by  itself,  does  not  give  any 
indication  of  what  had  occurred,  it  is  quite  certain 
that,  in  the  interval  between  Tirhakah's  war  with 
Sennacherib  and  "  Pharaoh-Necho's  "  invasion  of  Pal- 
estine, the  empire  of  Assyria  had  come  to  an  end. 
Necho  was  on  his  way  "  to  fight  against  Carchemish 
by  Euphrates  "  (2  Chron.  xxxv.  20)  with  "  the  house 
wherewith  he  had  war  "  (ibid.) ;  and  that  house  was 
not  the  old  one  of  the  Sargonidae,  wherewith  Tirhakah 


272  BAB YL ON  AND  EGYPT. 

had  contended,  but  a  new  "house"  which  had  recently 
come  into  power,  and  which  held  its  court,  not  at 
Nineveh,  but  at  Babylon  (Isa.  xlvi.  2).  The  exact 
year  of  the  fall  of  Assyria  is  indeed  uncertain;^  but 
all  authorities  agree  that  it  had  taken  place  before  the 
date  of  Necho's  expedition,  which  was  in  B.C.  608. 
By  "  king  of  Assyria,"  in  ver.  29,  we  must  therefore 
understand  king  of  Babylon,  just  as  in  Ezra  vi.  22  we 
must  understand  by  "  king  of  Assyria"  king  of  Persia. 
The  Babylonian  monarch,  Nabopolassar,  had  taken  a 
share  in  the  great  war  by  which  the  empire  of  the 
Assyrians  was  brought  to  an  end,^  and  had  succeeded 
to  Assyria's  rights  in  Western  Mesopotamia,  Syria, 
and  Palestine.  He  was  probably  regarded  by  Josiah 
as  his  suzerain,  and  therefore  entitled  to  such  help  as 
he  could  render  him. 

While  these  changes  had  taken  place  in  Asia,  in 
Africa  also  the  condition  of  affairs  was  very  much 
altered.  The  Ethiopian  dynasty,  after  its  long  struggle 
against  Assyria,  had  been  forced  to  yield,  had  given 
up  the  contest,  and  retired  from  Egypt  altogether.^ 
Assyria  had  for  a  time  held  Egypt  under  her  sway,  and, 
acting  in  the  spirit  of  the  maxim,  "  Divide  et  impera," 
had  split  up  the  country  among  no  fewer  than  twenty 
princes.  Of  these  some  had  been  Assyrians,  but  the 
greater  part  natives.  A  Necho  (Neku),  the  grand- 
father of  the  antagonist  of  Josiah,  had  held  the  first 

*  The  opinion  of  scholars  varies  between  B.  c.  625  and  B.  c.  610. 

'"Ancient  Monarchies,"  vol.  ii.,  p.  232. 

^  Lenormant,  "  Manuel  d'Histoire  Ancienne,"  vol.  ii.,  pp.  377,  378. 


NOTICES  IN  THE  SECOND  BOOK  OF  KINGS.     273 


place  among  the  twenty,  being  assigned  the  govern- 
ments of  Memphis  and  Sais,  together  with  almost  the 
whole  of  the  Western  Delta.  He  had  been  succeeded 
after  a  time  by  his  son  Psamatik,  the  Psammetichus 
of  the  Greeks,  who  had  taken  advantage  of  the  grow- 
ing weakness  of  Assyria  during  the  later  half  of  the 
seventh  century  to  raise  the  standard  of  revolt,  and 
had  succeeded,  by  the  assistance  of  Gyges,  king  of 
Lydia,  and  of  numerous  Greek  and  Carian  mercena- 
ries, in  establishing  his  own  independence  and  uniting 
all  Egypt  under  his  sway.  A  period  of  great  pros- 
perity had  then  set  in.  Psamatik  I.,  a  prudent,  and  at 
the  same  time  a  brave  and  warlike,  prince,  raised 
Egypt  from  a  state  of  extreme  depression  to  a  height 
which  she  had  only  previously  reached  under  the 
Osirtasens,  the  Thothmeses,  and  the  Ramessides. 
During  the  rapid  decline  and  decay  of  Assyrian  power 
which  followed  upon  the  death  of  Asshur-bani-pal 
(b.c.  626),  he  extended  his  sway  over  Philistia  and 
Phoenicia,  thus  resuming  the  policy  of  aggression 
upon  Asia  which  had  been  laid  aside,  at  any  rate  from 
the  time  of  Sheshonk.  The  opportunity  seemed  good 
for  re-establishing  Egyptian  influence  in  this  quarter, 
now  that  Assyria  was  approaching  her  end,  and  Baby- 
lon not  yet  established  as  her  successor. 

The  "  Pharaoh-Necho "  of  the  present  notice  is 
undoubtedly  Neku  II.,  the  son  and  successor  of 
Psamatik  I.  and  the  grandson  of  the  first  Neku.  He 
succeeded  his  father  in  B.C.  611  or  610,  and  held  the 
throne  till  B.C.  595  or  594.  He  left  behind  him  a 
iS 


274  £A^ yL ON  AND  EGYPT. 

high  character  for  courage  and  enterprise.  "  We 
must  see  in  him,"  says  Dr.  Wiedemann/  "  according 
to  the  narratives  of  the  Greek  historians,  one  of  the 
most  enterprising  and  excellent  sovereigns  of  all 
Egyptian  antiquity."  After  two  or  three  years  of 
preparation  for  war,  he  led  his  forces  into  Palestine  by 
the  coast  road  commonly  followed  by  his  prede- 
cessors, through  Philistia  and  Sharon  to  Megiddo,  on 
the  high  ground  separating  the  plain  of  Sharon  from 
that  of  Esdraelon.  Here,  on  a  battle-field  celebrated 
alike  in  ancient  and  in  modern  times,  he  was  con- 
fronted by  Josiah,  the  Jewish  monarch,  who  had 
recently  united  under  his  sway  the  greater  portion  of 
the  two  kingdoms  of  Israel  and  Judah.^  Necho, 
according  to  the  author  of  Chronicles,  endeavoured 
to  avoid  engaging  his  troops,  first  by  assuring  him 
that  his  quarrel  was  not  with  him,  but  with  the  royal 
house  of  Babylon  (2  Chron.  xxxiii.  21),  and  then  by 
urging  that  he  had  received  a  Divine  commission  to 
attack  his  enemy.  Assertions  of  this  kind  were  prob- 
ably not  unusual  in  the  mouths  of  Egyptian  princes, 
who  regarded  themselves  as  the  favourites  of  Heaven, 
sons  of  the  sun,  and  under  constant  Divine  protection. 
We  have  an  example  in  Piankhi,  one  of  the  Ethiopian 
monarchs  of  Egypt,  who,  when  marching  against  the 
native  princes  that  had  revolted  from  him,  declares,^ 
"  I  am  born  of  the  loins,  created  from  the  ^g^,  of  the 

^ "  Geshichte  ^gyptens  von  Psammetich  I.  bis  auf  Alexander  den 
Grossen,"  p.  147. 

2  2  Kings  xxiii.  15-19;  2  Chron.  xxxiv.  6-9. 
3"  Records  of  the  Past,"  vol.  ii.,  p.  91, 1,  69. 


NOTICES  IN  THE  SECOND  BOOK  OF  KINGS.     275 

Deity.  ...  I  have  not  acted  without  His  knowing : 
He  ordained  that  I  should  [so]  act."  Neither  argu- 
ment had  any  effect  on  the  resolution  of  the  Jewish 
king ;  he  probably  deemed  himself  bound,  as  a  faithful 
vassal,  to  bar  the  way  of  his  suzerain's  enemy ;  and 
Necho,  finding  him  thus  resolved,  was  compelled  to 
engage  his  forces.  The  battle,  commonly  known  as 
that  of  Megiddo,  seems  to  be  mentioned  by  Hero- 
dotus^ as  the  battle  of  Magdolum,  wherein  he  says 
that  Neko  (Necho)  defeated  the  "  Palestinian  Syrians," 
which  appears  to  be  his  name  for  the  Jews.  There  is 
reason  to  believe  that  the  chief  adversaries  of  the 
Jews  on  this  occasion  were  the  Greek  and  Carian  mer- 
cenaries in  the  Egyptian  service,  since  Necho  was  so 
pleased  at  their  behaviour  that  he  sent  the  arms  which 
he  had  worn  in  the  battle  as  an  offering  to  a  Greek 
temple  in  Asia  Minor. 

The  success  of  Necho  in  detaching  Syria  from  the 
Babylonian  empire,  and  attaching  it  to  his  own, 
implied  in  the  narrative  of  Kings,  and  in  Jer.  xlvi.  2, 
is  alluded  to  in  a  fragment  of  Berosus.^  Berosus,  as 
a  Babylonian,  ignores  Necho's  independent  position, 
and  speaks  of  him  as  the  "  satrap "  of  the  western 
provinces,  who  had  caused  them  to  "  revolt."  He 
regards  the  ''  revolt "  as  extending  to  Egypt,  Syria, 
and  Phoenicia,  and  as  lasting  until,  in  B.C.  605,  Nebu- 
chadnezzar was  sent  by  his  father  to  re-establish  the 
dominion  of  Babylon  in  the  far  west. 

1  Herod,  ii.  159. 

^Beros.  in  the  "  Fragm.  Hist.  Gr."  of  C.  Miiller,  vol.  ii.  Fr.  14. 


CHAPTER  XXI. 

NOTICES    OF    EGYPT    IN    ISAIAH. 

"  The  burden  of  Egypt.  Behold,  the  Lord  rideth  upon  a  swift  cloud, 
and  shall  come  into  Egypt ;  and  the  idols  of  Egypt  shall  be  moved  at 
His  presence,  and  the  heart  of  Egypt  shall  melt  in  the  midst  of  it. 
And  I  will  set  the  Egyptians  against  the  Egyptians ;  and  they  shall 
fight  every  one  against  his  brother,  and  every  one  against  his  neighbour ; 
city  against  city,  and  kingdom  against  kingdom.  And  the  spirit  of 
Egypt  shall  fail  in  the  midst  thereof:  and  they  shall  seek  to  the  idols, 
and  to  the  charmers,  and  to  them  that  have  familiar  spirits,  and  to  the 
wizards.  And  the  Egyptians  will  I  give  over  into  the  hands  of  a  cruel 
lord ;  and  a  fierce  king  shall  rule  over  them,  saith  the  Lord,  the  Lord 
of  hosts.  .  .  .  Surely  the  princes  of  Zoan  are  fools ;  the  counsel  of  the 
wise  counsellors  of  Pharaoh  is  become  brutish ;  how  say  ye  unto 
Pharaoh,  I  am  the  son  of  the  wise,  the  son  of  ancient  kings  ?  Where 
are  they  ?  where  are  thy  wise  men  ?  and  let  them  tell  thee  now,  and 
let  them  know  what  the  Lord  hath  pui-posed  upon  Egypt.  The  princes 
of  Zoan  are  become  fools,  the  princes  of  Noph  are  deceived ;  they 
have  also  seduced  Egypt,  even  they  that  are  the  stay  of  the  tribes 
thereof." — IsA.  xix.  1-13.    - 

It  was  a  principal  part  of  the  mission  of  Isaiah  during 
the  reign  of  Hezekiah  to  dissuade  the  Jews  from 
placing  their  dependence  on  Egypt  in  the  struggle 
wherein  they  were  engaged,  with  the  prophet's  entire 
consent  and  approval,  against  the  Assyrians.  Egypt, 
276 


NOTICES  IN  ISAIAH.  277 

it  was  revealed  to  him,  was  no  sure  stay,  no  trust- 
worthy ally,  no  powerful  protector ;  she  would  fail  in 
time  of  need,  either  unwilling  or  unable  to  give 
effectual  help.  (See  ch.  xx.  6;  xxx.  3,  7 ;  xxxi.  1-3.) 
Nor  was  this  the  worst.  So  long  as  king  and  people 
put  their  trust  in  an  "  arm  of  flesh,"  and  did  not  rely 
upon  God,  God's  arm  was  straitened,  and  he  could 
not  work  the  miraculous  deliverance,  which  He  was 
prepared  to  work, ''because  of  their  unbelief"  Isaiah's 
prophecies  with  respect  to  Egypt  are  thus,  almost 
entirely,  depreciatory  and  denunciatory.  He  is  bent  on 
showing  that  she  is  a  power  on  whom  no  dependence 
can  be  wisely  placed,  in  the  hope  that  he  may  thereby 
prevent  Hezekiah  and  his  princes  from  contracting 
any  alliance  with  the  Egyptian  monarch. 

In  this  first  prophecy  he  announces  two  calamities 
as  about  to  befall  Egypt,  either  of  which  is  sufficient 
to  render  her  an  utterly  worthless  ally.  The  first  of 
these  calamities  is  civil  war.  The  Egyptians  are  about 
to  "  fight  every  one  against  his  brother,  and  every  one 
against  his  neighbour;  city  against  city,  and  kingdom 
against  kingdom."  It  is  a  remarkable  illustration  of 
this  prophecy  to  find,  as  we  do,  from  an  inscription  of 
Piankhi-Merammon,^  that  about  B.C.  735  Egypt  was 
divided  up  among  no  fewer  than  twenty-two  princes, 
of  whom  four  bore  the  title  of  "  king,"  and  that  a  civil 
war  raged  among  them  for  some  considerable  time. 
Tafnekht,  prince  of  Sais,  began  the  disturbance  by  a 

^  See  "Records  of  the  Past,"  vol.  ii.,  pp.  81-104;  and  compare 
Brugsch,  "  Geschichte  i^gyptens,"  pp.  682-707, 


278  BAB YL ON  AND  EGYPT. 

series  of  skilfully  arranged  encroachments  upon  his 
neighbours.  *'  During  several  years  he  laid  siege 
successively  to  the  fortresses  which  were  held  by  the 
independent  militaiy  chiefs  and  the  petty  princes  of 
the  western  portion  of  Lower  Egypt.  Once  master 
of  all  the  territory  to  the  west  of  the  middle  branch 
of  the  Nile,  Tafnekht,  respecting  the  dominion  of  the 
dynasty  of  Tanis  over  the  Eastern  Delta,  proceeded 
to  mount  the  stream,  in  order  to  make  himself  master 
of  Central  Egypt,  and  even  with  the  intention  of 
essaying  the  conquest  of  Upper  Egypt,  which  was  in 
the  possession  of  the  Ethiopian  kings  of  Napata  at 
this  period.  The  stronghold  of  Meri-tum,  now  Mey- 
doum,  the  district  of  Lake  Moeris,  the  city  of  Hera- 
cleopolis,  with  its  king  Pefaabast,  and  that  of  Hermo- 
polis,  with  its  king  Osorkon,  recognised  his  authority 
as  sovereign.  He  also  made  himself  master  of 
Aphroditopolis,  and,  pursuing  his  career  of  success, 
was  in  course  of  conquering  the  canton  of  Ouab,  with 
its  capital,  Pa-matsets,  when  the  chiefs  of  the  upper 
and  lower  country  who  had  not  yet  bowed  their  heads 
to  his  yoke  invoked  the  aid  of  the  Ethiopian  mon- 
arch." ^  Piankhi  gladly  responded  to  the  call,  and  in 
the  course  of  one  or  two  campaigns  succeeded  in 
despoiling  Tafnekht  of  all  his  conquests,  and  in 
restoring  Egypt  to  tranquillity.  He  then  reigned  for 
some  years  in  peace ;  but  at  his  death  disturbances 
broke  out  afresh.  Bocchoris,  or  Bok-en-ranf,  who 
succeeded  Tafnekht  at  Sais,  had  a  reign  as  troubled 

1  Lenormant,  "  Manuel  d'Histoive  Ancienne,"  vol.  ii.  p.  344. 


NOTICES  IN  ISAIAH.  279 


as  his  predecessor's.  "  It  was,"  says  M.  Lenormant/ 
"an  incessant  struggle  against  the  petty  princes,  a 
continuous  series  of  wars,  first  for  the  subjection  of 
the  Delta  and  Central  Egypt,  nay,  even  temporarily  of 
the  Thebaid,  and  then  for  the  preservation  of  his  con- 
quests, and  the  maintenance  with  much  difficulty  of  a 
precarious  dominion."  In  the  end  Bocchoris  suc- 
cumbed to  Shabak,  the  successor  of  Piankhi,  who 
punished  his  rebellion,  as  he  considered  it,  by  burning 
him  alive.^  A  third  occasion  of  civil  war,  belonging 
to  a  somewhat  later  date,  is  mentioned  by  Herodotus. 
Psammetichus,  the  founder  of  the  twenty-sixth  dynasty, 
had  to  contend,  according  to  this  author,^  with  eleven 
of  his  brother  princes  before  he  succeeded  in  uniting 
all  Egypt  under  his  sceptre.  Briefly,  it  may  be  said 
that  Egypt  from  about  B.C.  735  to  B.C.  650,  suffered 
from  a  continued  series  of  civil  wars,  which  rendered 
her  exceptionally  weak,  and  caused  her  to  fall  an  easy 
prey  alternately  to  the  Ethiopians  and  the  Assyrians. 

The  other  calamity  prophesied  is  that  of  conquest 
by  a  foreign  king  of  a  fierce  and  cruel  temper.  *'  The 
Egyptians  will  I  give  over  into  the  hands  of  a  cruel 
lord ;  and  a  fierce  king  shall  rule  over  them,  saith  the 
Lord  "  (ver.  4).  The  Egyptian  and  Assyrian  records 
show  that,  between  the  years  B.C.  750  and  B.C.  650, 
Egypt  was  conquered  at  least  five  times,  and  was  ruled 
by  at  least  eight  foreign   monarchs.     The  first   con- 

1  Lenormant,  "Manuel  d'Histoire  Ancienne,"  vol.  ii.,  p.  349. 

2  Manetho" ap.  JSyncell.,  "Chronograph.,"  p.  74,  b. 

3  Herod.,  ii.  152. 


28o  BAB YL ON  AND  EGYPT. 

quest — that  of  Piankhi  Merammon — was  certainly  not 
a  subjection  to  a  "  fierce  and  cruel  lord,"  for  Piankhi 
was  a  remarkably  mild  and  clement  prince,  who  did 
not  even  punish  rebellion  with  any  severity.^  Shabak, 
the  next  conqueror  after  Piankhi,  was  cruel ;  but  he 
can  scarcely  be  the  monarch  intended,  since  he  was 
accepted  as  a  legitimate  Pharaoh ;  the  "  princes  of 
Zoan  and  Noph "  were  his  counsellors;  and,  if  the 
prophecy  touches  him  at  all,  it  is  as  the  deceived  and 
misled  Pharaoh  of  ver.  ii,not  as  the  ''fierce  king" 
of  ver.  4.  The  same  may  be  said  of  his  successors, 
Shabatok  and  Tirhakah,  who  were  closely  connected 
with  Noph  (Napata),  and  were  recognised  as  legitimate 
Pharaoh's.  It  is  to  an  Assyrian,  not  to  an  Ethiopian, 
conqueror  that  the  prophecy  must  refer,  and  hence 
doubtless  the  introduction  of  Assyria  by  name  into 
the  later  part  of  the  prophecy,  which  in  a  certain  sense 
balances  the  earlier  (vers.  23-25).  Two  successive 
Assyrian  monarchs  conquered  Egypt,  Esar-haddon 
and  Asshur-bani-pal.  Either  of  the  two  would  corres- 
pond well  to  the  description  of  the  "  fierce  king  and 
cruel  lord."  Esar-haddon,  who  had  Manasseh  brought 
before  him  with  a  hook  passed  through  his  jaws  (2 
Chron.  xxxiii.  1 1),  who  broke  up  Egypt  into  twenty 
governments  and  changed  the  names  of  the  towns,^ 
who  usually  executed  rebels,  and  is  said  by  his  son  to 
have  appointed  governors  over  the  various  provinces 
of  Egypt  for  the  express  purpose  of  slaying  and  plun- 

^  Rawlinson,  «*  History  of  Ancient  Egypt,"  vol.  ii.,  p.  443. 
^  G.  Smith,  "  Hisloiy  of  Asshur-bani-pal,"  pp.  34,  35. 


NOTICES  IN  ISAIAH.  281 

dering  its  people/  was  certainly  a  severe  and  harsh 
monarch,  who  might  well  answer  to  the  description  of 
Isaiah;  and  Asshur-bani-pal,  his  successor,  who  rivetted 
the  Assyrian  yoke  on  the  reluctant  country,  was  a  yet 
more  cruel  and  relentless  tyrant.  Asshur-bani-pal 
burnt  alive  his  own  brother,  Saul-Mugina,  caused 
several  of  his  prisoners  to  be  chained  and  flayed,  tore 
out  the  tongues  of  others  by  the  roots,  punished  many 
by  mutilation,  and  was  altogether  the  most  cruel  and 
bloodthirsty  of  all  the  Assyrian  monarchs  of  whom 
any  record  has  come  down  to  us.^  It  is  probably  his 
conquest  of  Egypt  in  B.C.  668-666  which  Isaiah's 
prophecy  announces,  though  it  is  quite  possible  that 
Isaiah  may  have  himself  expected  an  earlier  accom- 
plishment of  the  prediction.'^ 

"  In  the  year  that  Tartan  came  unto  Ashdod,  when  Sargon,  the  king 
of  Assyria,  sent  him,  and  fought  against  Ashdod,  and  took  it,  at  the 
same  time  spake  the  Lord  by  Isaiah,  the  son  of  Amoz,  saying,  Go  and 
loose  the  sackcloth  from  off  thy  loins,  and  put  ofif  thy  shoe  from  thy 
foot.  And  he  did  so,  walking  naked  and  barefoot.  And  the  Lord 
said,  Like  as  my  servant  Isaiah  hath  walked  naked  and  barefoot  three 
years  for  a  sign  and  wonder  upon  Egypt  and  upon  Ethiopia,  so  shall 
the  king  of  Assyria  lead  away  the  Egyptians  prisoners,  and  the  Ethio- 
pians captives,  young  and  old,  naked  and  barefoot,  even  with  their 
buttocks  uncovered,  to  the  shame  of  Egypt.  And  they  shall  be  afraid 
and  ashamed  of  Ethiopia  their  expectation,  and  of  Egypt  their  glory. 
And  the  inhabitant  of  this  isle  shall  say  in  that  day,  Behold,  such  is 
our  expectation,  whither  we  flee  for  help  to  be  delivered  from  the  king 
of  Assyria:  and  how  shall  we  escape?  " — IsA.  xx.  1-6. 

1  G.  Smith,  "  History  of  Asshur-bani-pal,"  p.  16.  » 

2  See  "Ancient  Monarchies,"  vol.  ii.,  p.  206. 

8  As  Mr.  Cheyne  supposes  :  "  Comment  on  Isaiah,"  vol.  i.,  pp.  J 1 2, 1 1 3. 


282  BAB  YLON  AND  EG  YPT. 

The  general  warning  contained  in  Isaiah's  "  burden 
of  Egypt "  failed  altogether  of  its  intended  effect.  In 
Israel  Hoshea,  about  B.C.  724,  entered  into  alliance 
with  Shabak  (So),  and  thereby  provoked  the  ruin 
which  fell  both  on  himself  and  his  country.  The 
lesson  was  lost  on  Hezekiah  and  his  counsellors,  who, 
as  the  attitude  of  the  Assyrians  became  more  and 
more  threatening,  inclined  more  and  more  to  follow 
Hoshea's  example  and  place  themselves  under  the 
protection  of  Egypt.  Egj^pt  was  at  this  time,  as 
already  explained,  closely  connected  with  Ethiopia, 
which  under  Piankhi,  Shabak,  Shabatok,  and  Tirhakah, 
exercised  the  rights  of  a  suzerain  power,  permitting, 
however,  to  certain  native  Egyptian  princes  a  delegated 
sovereignty.  Hence  the  close  connection  in  which  we 
find  Ethiopia  and  Egypt  placed  in  the  present  pro- 
phecy. In  the  year  that  the  Assyrian  Tartan,  or 
commander-in-chief,  took  Ashdod,  having  been 
assigned  the  task  by  Sargon,  king  of  Assyria,  the 
successor  of  Shalmaneser  IV.,  and  father  of  Sennach- 
erib— probably  the  year  B.C.  714 — Isaiah  was  directed 
to  renew  his  warning  against  trust  in  these  African 
powers  They  had  become  the  **  glory "  and  the 
"  expectation  "  of  his  countrymen,  whither  they  were 
ready  to  *' flee  for  help "  (vers.  5,  6).  In  order  to 
impress  the  Jews  with  the  folly  of  their  vain  hopes, 
Isaiah  was  instructed  to  announce. a  coming  victory 
of  Assyria  over  combined  Egypt  and  Ethiopia,  the 
result  of  which  would  be  a  great  removal  of  captives, 
belonging  to  both  nations,  from  the  banks  of  the  Nile 


NOTICES  IN  ISAIAH.  283 

to  those  of  the  Tigris,  to  the  great  "  shame  "  of  the 
conquered  and  the  great  glory  of  the  conquerors.  To 
arrest  the  attention  of  his  nation,  he  was  to  take  the 
garb  of  a  prisoner  himself,  and  to  go  barefoot  and 
"naked,"  i.e.^  clad  in  a  single  scant  tunic,  for  three 
years,  at  the  end  of  which  time  his  prophecy  would 
be  accomplished.  The  prophecy  seems  to  have  had 
its  first  accomplishment  when,  in  B.C.  711,  Ashdod 
revolted  from  Assyria,  under  promise  of  support  from 
the  Ethiopian  Pharaoh  of  the  period,  and  was  cap- 
tured, with  its  garrison,  which  is  likely  to  have  con- 
sisted in  part  of  Egyptians  and  Ethiopians.  We  are 
expressly  told  that  the  prisoners  were  on  this  occa- 
sion transported  into  Assyria,  their  place  being  supplied 
by  captives  taken  in  some  of  Sargon's  eastern  wars.^ 

Ten  years  later,  in  the  reign  of  Sennacherib,  there 
was  another  occasion  of  collision  between  Assyria  and 
Egypt  in  a  war  provoked  by  the  revolt  of  Ekron.  In 
the  battle  of  Eltekeh  (b.c.  701)  both  Ethiopians  and 
Egyptians  are  expressly  declared  to  have  been 
engaged,  and  many  prisoners  of  both  nations  to  have 
been  taken.^  These  were,  no  doubt,  carried  off  by 
the  conqueror. 

Later,  in  the  wars  of  Esar-haddon  and  Asshur-bani- 
pal  with  Tirhakah,  there  must  have  been  numerous 
occasions  of  a  similar  kind.^    The  entire  course  of  the 

^"Ancient  Monarchies,"  vol.  ii.,  p.  147. 
2  "Records  of  the  Past,"  vol.  i.,  pp.  36,  37. 

3 See  Mr.  George  Smith's  "History  of  Asshur-bani  pal,"  pp.  16,  19, 
23,  54,  etc. 


284  BAB  YL ON  AND  EG  YPT. 

Struggle  between  Assyria  on  the  one  hand  and 
Ethiopia  and  Egypt  on  the  other  was  adverse  to 
the  latter  peoples  until  the  strength  of  Assyria  col- 
lapsed at  home,  and  she  (about  B.C.  650)  withdrew 
her  forces  from  Egypt  to  the  defence  of  her  own 
territory. 

"  Woe  to  the  rebellious  children,  saith  the  L  ord,  that  take  counsel, 
but  not  of  Me;  and  that  cover  with  a  covering,  but  not  of  My  Spirit, 
that  they  may  add  sin  to  sin,  that  walk  to  go  down  into  Egypt,  and 
have  not  asked  at  My  mouth,  to  strengthen  themselves  in  the  strength 
of  Pharaoh,  and  to  trust  in  the  shadow  of  Egypt !  Therefore  shall  the 
strength  of  Pharaoh  be  your  shame,  and  the  trust  in  the  shadow  of 
Egypt  your  confusion.  For  his  princes  were  at  Zoan,  and  his  ambassa- 
dors came  to  Hanes.  They  were  all  ashamed  of  a  people  that  could 
not  profit  them,  nor  be  a  help  nor  profit,  but  a  shame  and  also  a 
reproach.  The  burden  of  the  beasts  of  the  south :  into  the  land  of 
trouble  and  anguish,  from  whence  come  the  young  and  old  lion,  the 
viper  and  fiery  flying  serpent,  they  will  carry  their  riches  upon  the 
shoulders  of  young  asses,  and  their  treasures  upon  the  bunches  of 
camels,  to  a  people  that  shall  not  profit  them.  For  the  Egyptians  shall 
help  in  vain,  and  to  no  purpose  ;  therefore  have  I  cried  concerning  this. 
Their  strength  is  to  sit  still." — IsA.  xxx.  1-7. 

"  Woe  to  them  that  go  down  to  Egypt  for  help ;  and  stay  on  horses, 
and  trust  in  chariots,  because  they  are  many ;  and  in  horsemen,  because 
they  are  very  strong;  but  they  look  not  unto  the  Holy  One  of  Israel, 
neither  seek  the  Lord  !  .  .  .  Now  the  Egyptians  are  men,  and  not  God, 
and  their  horses  flesh,  and  not  spirit.  When  the  Lord  shall  stretch  out 
His  hand,  both  he  that  helpeth  shall  fall,  and  he  that  is  helper -shall  fall 
down,  and  they  all  shall  fall  together.  For  thus  hath  the  Lord  spoken 
unto  me.  Like  as  the  lion  and  the  young  lion  roaring  on  his  prey,  when 
a  multitude  of  shepherds  is  called  forth  against  him,  he  will  not  be 
afraid  of  their  voice  nor  abase  himself  for  the  noise  of  them ;  so  shall 
the  Lord  of  hosts  come  down  to  fight  for  Mount  Zion  and  for  the  hill 
thereof.  As  birds  flying,  so  will  the  Lord  of  hosts  defend  Jerusalem ; 
...  He  will  preserve  it." — IsA.  xxxi.  1-5. 


NOTICES  IN  ISAIAH.  285 


Matters    have   now   progressed   a   stage.      Isaiah's 
warnings  are  not  only  unheeded,  but  set  at  nought. 
Alarmed  at  the  advances  that  Sennacherib  has  made 
and  is  making,  convinced,  not  perhaps  without  reason, 
that  the  policy  of  Assyria  is  to  leave  him  the  mere 
shadow  of  independence,  Hezekiah  has  taken  the  final 
plunge.     Declining  to  ask  counsel  of  God's  prophet 
(ver.  i),  he  has  sent  ambassadors  of  high  rank  (ver.  4), 
accompanied  by  a  train  of  camels  and  asses,  laden  with 
rich    presents   (ver.  6),  to   the   court   of    the   vassal 
Pharaoh  to  whom  is  committed  the  government  of 
Lower  Egypt.     "  His  "  (/.  e.,  Hezekiah's)  **  princes  are 
at  Zoan "  (Tanis) ;   *'  his  ambassadors   have  come  to 
Hanes."     He    has   made   application    for   a  force   of 
chariots  and  cavalry  (ch.  xxxvi.  9).     He  has  probably 
sent  a  prayer  to  the  Ethiopian  suzerain  of  the  country, 
requesting  him  to  move  to  his  relief     The  thing  is 
done,  and  cannot  be  undone ;  and  it  remains  only  for  the 
prophet  to  make  a  declaration,  first,  that  it  has  been 
done  against  God's  will  (vers,  i,  9,  12),  and  secondly, 
that  it  will  be  of  no  avail — nothing  will  come  of  it — 
the  Egyptians  will  give  no  effectual  help  (vers.  5,  7). 
The  historical  chapters  of  Isaiah,  especially  chapters 
xxxvi.  and  xxxvii.,  are  the  sequel  to  this  intimation. 
They  show  that  Hezekiah  received  no  help  at  all  from 
the  subordinate  Pharaoh,  who  was  probably  Shabatok, 
and  that  though  Tirhakah  did   move  on   his  behalf 
(ch.  xxxvii.  9),  yet  that  he  neither  engaged  the  forces 
of  Sennacherib,  nor  seriously  troubled  him.     The  relief 
of  Hezekiah,  and  the   relief  of  Egypt  itself— whose 


286  BAB  YL  ON  AND  E G  YFT. 

subjection  to  Assyria  was  thereby  deferred  for  a  gen- 
eration— came  from  another  quarter.  When  Hezekiah 
gave  up  his  trust  in  any  arm  of  flesh,  and  made  his 
appeal  to  God,  spreading  before  Him  the  blasphemous 
letter  of  Sennacherib  (ibid.,  vers.  14-20),  then  Isaiah 
was  commissioned  to  assure  him  of  a  miraculous 
deliverance.  "  Then  "  ("  that  night,"  2  Kings  xix.  35) 
"  the  angel  of  the  Lord  went  forth,  and  smote  in  the 
camp  of  the  Assyrians  an  hundred  and  fourscore  and 
five  thousand :  and  when  they  arose  early  in  the 
morning,  behold,  they  were  all  dead  corpses  "  (Isa. 
xxxvii.  36).  The  deliverance  itself,  and  its  miraculous, 
or  at  any  rate  its  marvellous  character,  was  acknowl- 
edged by  the  Egyptians,  no  less  than  by  the  Israelites. 
When,  two  hundred  and  fifty  years  afterwards,  Hero- 
dotus visited  Egypt,  he  was  informed  that  **  Senna- 
cherib, king  of  the  Arabians  and  Assyrians,  having 
marched  a  great  army  into  Egypt,  was  met  at  Pelusium 
by  the  Egyptian  monarch.  As  the  two  hosts  lay 
there  opposite  one  another,  there  came  in  the  night  a 
number  of  field-mice,  which  devoured  all  the  quivers 
and  bow  strings  of  the  enemy,  and  ate  the  thongs  by 
which  they  managed  their  shields.  Next  morning 
they  commenced  their  flight,  and  great  multitudes  fell, 
as  they  had  no  arms  with  which  to  defend  themslves."  * 

"  In  that  day  shall  five  cities  in  the  land  of  Egypt  speak  the  language 
of  Canaan,  and  swear  to  the  Lord  of  hosts;  one  shall  be  called  the 
city  of  destruction.  In  that  day  shall  there  be  an  altar  to  the  Lord  in 
the  midst  of  the  land  of  Egypt,  and  a  pillar  at  the  border  thereof  to 

1  Herod,  ii,  141. 


NOTICES  IN  ISAIAH.  287 

the  Lord.  And  it  shall  be  for  a  sign  and  for  a  witness  unto  the  Lord 
of  hosts  in  the  land  of  Egypt :  for  they  shall  cry  unto  the  Lord  because 
of  the  oppressors,  and  He  shall  send  them  a  saviour,  and  a  great  one, 
and  he  shall  deliver  them.  And  the  Lord  shall  be  known  to  Egypt, 
and  the  Egyptians  shall  know  the  Lord  in  that  day,  and  shall  do  sacri- 
fice and  oblation ;  yea,  they  shall  vow  a  vow  unto  the  Lord,  and 
perform  it.  And  the  Lord  shall  smite  Egypt :  He  shall  smite  and  heal 
it ;  and  they  shall  return  even  to  the  Lord,  and  He  shall  be  entreated 
of  them,  and  He  shall  heal  them." — Isa.  xix.  18-22. 

This  prophecy  has  been  called  a  mere  expression  of 
Isaiah's  earnest  wish  for  the  conversion  of  Egypt  to 
the  worship  of  the  true  God,^  but  it  is  at  any  rate  a 
wish  which  had  a  remarkable  fulfilment.  About  the 
year  B.C.  170,  Onias,  the  son  of  Onias  III.,  the  high- 
priest,  quitted  Palestine,  and  sought  refuge  with 
Ptolemy  Philometor,  who  readily  protected  him  on 
account  of  the  hostility  between  the  two  royal  houses 
of  Egypt  and  of  Syria.  While  a  refugee  at  his  court, 
Onias,  regarding  the  position  of  his  brethren  in  Pales- 
tine, oppressed  by  Antiochus  Epiphanes,  as  well-nigh 
hopeless,  conceived  the  idea  of  founding  and  main- 
taining a  temple  in  Egypt  itself,  which  should  be  free 
from  the  corruptions  then  creeping  in  at  Jerusalem, 
and  should  be  a  rallying-point  to  the  Jewish  nation, 
should  the  temple  on  Mount  Zion  be  destroyed  or 
made  a  heathen  fane.  Under  these  circumstances  he 
made  appeal  to  Ptolemy  and  his  wife  Cleopatra  for  the 
grant  of  a  site.  '*  In  the  district  of  Heliopolis,  a  part 
of  Egypt  already  consecrated  by  the  memory  of 
Moses  (Gen.  xli.  45),  he  had   observed  a  spot  where 

^  Stanley,  "  Lectures  on  the  Jewish  Church."  Am.  Ed.,  vol.  iii.,  p.  223. 


288  BAB  YL  ON  A  ND  EGYPT. 

a  sanctuary  of  Bubastis  (Pasht),  a  goddess  of  the 
country,  was  languishing  among  the  thousand  other 
Egyptian  sanctuaries.  This  place  he  requested  for 
himself,  and  it  was  reported  that  Ptolemy  granted  it 
with  the  jesting  remark  that  he  wondered  how  Onias 
could  think  of  making  a  sanctuary  out  of  a  spot 
which,  though  inhabited  by  sacred  animals,  was  yet  in 
the  Judaean  sense  polluted,  for  the  animals  were 
among  those  reckoned  unclean  by  the  Judaeans.  In 
the  sanctuary  itself  was  placed  an  altar  resembling  that 
at  Jerusalem.  Instead  of  the  seven-lighted  candle- 
stick, which  seems  to  have  been  regarded  as  too  holy 
to  be  imitated,  a  single  golden  lamp  was  suspended  in 
it  by  a  golden  chain.  The  sacred  house  was  built 
somewhat  in  the  form  of  a  tower  " — the  general  style 
of  the  building  being  apparently  not  Jewish,  but 
Egyptian  * — "  the  fore-court  was  enclosed  with  a  wall 
of  brick  and  gates  of  stone,  and  the  whole  of  the 
fortified  little  town,  with  the  district  which  gathered 
round  the  temple,  was  probably  called  Oneion."^ 

This  temple  continued  to  exist  from  B.C.  170  to  B.C. 
73,  when  it  was  destroyed  by  the  Romans.  It  was 
greatly  venerated  by  the  bulk  of  the  Egyptian  Jews, 
who  brought  thither  their  sacrifices  and  their  offerings. 
Jews  flocked  to  the  towns  in  its  neighbourhood  ;  and 
it  may  well  be,  though  the  actual  fact  cannot  be 
proved,  that  then  at  least  "  five  cities  in  the  land  of 

^  Stanley,  "  Lectures  on  the  Jewish  Church,  Am.  Ed.,  vol.  iii.,  p.  222. 
"Ewald,  "History  of    Israel,"   vol.   v.,  p.  356,   E.   T.      Compare 
Joseph.,  "Ant.  Jud.,"  xiii.  3,  ^  2, 


NOTICES  IN  ISAIAH.  289 

Egypt  spoke  "  (Hebrew)  "  the  language  of  Canaan,"  one 
of  them  being  Ir-ha-kheres,  "  the  city  of  the  sun,"  the 
ancient  Heliopolis.^  At  the  same  time  the  great 
synagogue  of  Alexandria,  at  the  extreme  "border"  of 
the  land,  where  it  was  most  commonly  approached  by 
strangers,  stood  '*  as  a  pillar  "  (ch.  xix.  19)  "  for  a  sign 
and  for  a  witness  unto  the  Lord  of  hosts,"  showine 
that  Jehovah  was  worshipped  in  the  land  openly,  and 
with  the  goodwill  of  the  Government,  and  indicating 
that  Egypt — so  long  Jehovah's  enemy — had  been  at 
least  partially,  converted  to  His  service. 

1  See  Mr.  R.  S.  Poole's  article  on  IR-HA-HERES  in  Smith's  "Diet, 
of  the  Bible,"  vol.  i.,  p.  870. 

19 


CHAPTER  XXII. 

NOTICES    OF    EGYPT    IN    JEREMIAH   AND  EZEKIEL. 

The  prophecies  of  Jeremiah  have  suffered  greatly  by 
disarrangement ;  and  the  historical  notices  which  they 
contain,  more  especially  those  that  concern  Egypt,  are 
wholly  out  of  their  proper  chronological  order.  We 
propose,  therefore,  to  follow  the  actual  order  of  time 
rather  than  that  of  Jeremiah's  chapters  according  to 
our  translators'  arrangement,^  and  we  consequently 
commence  with  one  of  the  latest  of  his  notices, 
namely,  that  contained  in  the  earlier  portion  of  his 
forty-sixth  chapter : — 

"  The  word  of  the  Lord  which  came  to  Jeremiah  the  prophet  against 
the  Gentiles,  against  Eg)-pt,  against  the  army  of  Pharaoh-Necho,  king 
of  Egypt,  which  was  by  the  river  Euphrates  in  Carchemish,  which 
Nebuchadnezzar,  king  of  Babylon,  smote  in  the  fourth  year  of  Jehoia- 
kim,  the  son  of  Josiah,  king  of  Judah.  Order  ye  the  buckler  and 
shield,  and  draw  near  to  battle.  Harness  the  horses  ;  and  get  up,  ye 
horsemen,  and  stand  forth  with  your  helmets ;  furbish  the  spears,  and 
put  on  the  brigandines.  Wherefore  have  I  seen  them  dismayed  and 
turned  away  back  ?  and  their  mighty  ones  are  beaten  down,  and  are  fled 
apace,  and  look  not  back  :    for  fear  was  round  about,  saith  the  Lord. 

1  Our  translators  follbw  the  Hebrew.     The  Septuagint  arrangement  is 
quite  different. 
290 


NOTICES  IN  JEREMIAH  AND  EZEKIEL.         291 

Let  not  the  swift  flee  away,  nor  the  mighty  man  escape ;  they  shall 
stumble  and  fall  towards  the  north,  by  the  river  Euphrates.  Who  is 
this  that  Cometh  up  as  a  flood,  whose  watei-s  are  moved  as  the  rivers  ? 
Egypt  riseth  up  like  a  flood,  and  his  waters  are  moved  like  the  rivers , 
and  he  saith,  I  will  go  up  and  cover  the  earth ;  I  will  destroy  the  city 
and  the  inhabitants  thereof.  Come  up,  ye  horses,  and  rage,  ye  chariots ; 
and  let  the  mighty  men  come  forth ;  the  Ethiopians  and  the  Libyans, 
that  handle  the  shield ;  and  the  Lydians,  that  handle  and  bend  the  bow. 
For  this  is  the  day  of  the  Lprd  God  of  hosts,  a  day  of  vengeance,  that 
he  may  avenge  him  of  his  adversaries ;  and  the  sword  shall  devour,  and 
it  shall  be  satiate  and  made  drunk  with  their  blood ;  for  the  Lord  God 
of  hosts  hath  a  sacrifice  in  the  north  countiy  by  the  river  Euphrates. 
Go  up  into  Gilead,  and  take  balm,  O  virgin,  the  daughter  of  Egypt ;  in 
vain  shalt  thou  use  many  medicines ;  for  thou  shalt  not  be  cured.  The 
nations  have  heard  of  thy  shame,  and  thy  cry  hath  filled  the  land ;  for 
the  mighty  man  hath  stumbled  against  the  mighty,  and  they  are  fallen 
both  together." — Jer.  xlvi.  1-12. 

In  this  passage  we  have  the  fullest  account  that  has 
come  down  to  us  of  one  of  the  most  important  among 
the  "  decisive  battles  of  the  world."  The  contending 
powers  are  Egypt  and  Babylon,  the  contending  princes 
Neko  (Pharaoh-Necho),  the  son  of  Psamatik  I.,  and 
Nebuchadnezzar,  the  son  of  Nabopolassar — the 
founder  of  the  second  empire  of  the  Chaldaeans.  We 
have  already  seen^  how  Neko,  having  (in  B.C.  608) 
defeated  Josiah,  king  of  Judah,  at  Megiddo,  on  the 
border  of  the  great  plain  of  Esdraelon,  pressed  for- 
ward to  meet  the  "  house  with  which  he  had  war  at 
Carchemish  by  Euphrates"  (2  Chron.  xxxv.  20). 
Complete  success  for  the  time  attended  his  expedition. 
He  made  himself  master  of  the  whole  tract  of  terri- 

^See  p.  271. 


292 


BAB  YL ON  AND  EG  YFT. 


tory  intervening  between  the  ** river  of  Egypt"  (Wady- 
el-Arish)  on  the  one  hand  and  the  river  Euphrates  on 
the  other  (2  Kings  xxiv.  7).  Syria  in  its  widest  extent, 
Phoenicia,  Philistia,  and  Judaea  submitted  to  him.  It 
seemed  as  if  the  days  of  the  Thothmeses  and  Amen- 
hoteps  were  about  to  return,  and  Egypt  to  be  once 
more  the  predominant  power  in  the  Eastern  world, 
the  "  lady  of  nations,"  the  sovereign  at  one  and  the 
same  time  of  Africa  and  of  Asia.  Had  Babylon 
acquiesced  in  the  loss  of  territory,  her  prestige  would 
have  been  gone,  and  her  empire  would  probably  have 
soon  crumbled  into  dust.  Egypt  and  Media  would 
have  stood  face  to  face  as  the  two  rivals  for  supremacy ; 
and  possibly  the  entire  course  of  the  world's  later 
history  might  have  been  changed. 

But  Nabopolassar  appreciated  aright  the  importance 
of  the  crisis,  and  before  Egypt  had  had  time  to  con- 
solidate her  power  in  the  newly  conquered  provinces, 
resolved  on  making  a  great  effort  to  recover  them.  In 
the  year  b.  c.  605 — three  years  after  Neko's  great  succes3 
— having  collected  his  troops  and  made  his  prepara- 
tions, he  sent  his  son  and  heir,  Nebuchadnezzar,  at  the 
head  of  a  large  army,  to  reconquer  the  lost  territory. 
Nebuchadnezzar  marched  upon  Carchemish,  the  strong 
frontier  fortress  near  the  Euphrates,  which  had  origin- 
ally been  the  capital  of  the  early  Hittite  kingdom,  and 
the  site  of  which  is  now  marked  by  the  ruins  called 
"Jerablus"  or  "Jerabus."^  Here  he  found  Neko 
encamped  at  the  head  of  a  considerable  force,  in  part, 

^  Sayce,  ** Ancient  Empires  of  the  East,"  American  Edition,  p.  214. 


NOTICES  IN  JEREMIAH  AND  EZEKIEL.         293 

no  doubt,  Egyptians,  but  mainly  Ethiopians,  Libyans, 
and  Greco-Carians  from  Asia  Minor,  perhaps  the 
"  Lydians  "  of  Jeremiah  (ver.  9).^  The  battle  poetic- 
ally described  by  Jeremiah  was  fought.  The  Egyp- 
tian force  of  foot,  horse,  and  chariots  was  completely 
defeated;  a  great  carnage  took  place  (ver.  10);  and 
the  few  survivors  fled  away  in  dismay  (ver.  5),  evac- 
uating province  after  province,  and  retiring  within 
their  own  frontier.  Nebuchadnezzar  followed  on  their 
traces,  at  least  as  far  south  as  Jerusalem,  where  he 
received  the  submission  of  Jehoiakim  (2  Kings  xxiv. 
i),  and  from  which  he  carried  off  a  portion  of  the 
temple  treasures  (Dan.  i.  i).  He  would  probably  have 
gone  further  and  invaded  Egypt  had  not  news  reached 
him  (late  in  B.C.  605)  of  his  father's  decease,  which 
necessitated  his  own  immediate  return  to  his  capital. 
Accompanied  by  a  small  force  lightly  equipped,  he 
crossed  the  desert  by  way  of  Damascus  and  Tadmor, 
while  the  heavy-armed  troops,  the  baggage,  and  the 
prisoners  made  their  way  to  Babylon  by  the  usual  but 
circuitous  route,  down  the  valley  of  the  Orontes,  across 
Northern  Syria  to  Carchemish,  and  then  along  the 
banks  of  the  Euphrates. 

We  have  one  profane  account  of  this  expedition, 
entering  far  less  into  details  than  Jeremiah,  but  in 
complete  accord  with   his  statements,  and  supplying 


^"Lud"  in  the  Hebrew  Scriptures  ordinarily  designates  an  African 
people  (see  Gen.  x.  13;  i  Chron.  i.  11  ;  Isa.  Ixvi.  19;  Ezek.  xxx.  5). 
But  here  the  "Lydians"  may  be  meant.  Gyges  had  furnished  the 
original  Greco-Carian  force. 


294  BAB  YL  ON  AND  EGYPT. 

various  points  of  interest,  which  have  been  worked 
into  the  above  narrative.  The  Babylonian  historian, 
Berosus,^  as  quoted  by  Josephus,  says,  speaking  of 
Nebuchadnezzar:  "When  his  father,  Nabopolassar, 
heard  that  the  satrap  appointed  to  govern  Egypt,  and 
the  districts  of  Coelesyria  and  Phoenicia,  had  revolted 
from  him,  as  he  was  not  himself  able  any  longer  to 
endure  hardships,  he  assigned  a  certain  portion  of  his 
army  to  his  son,  Nebuchadnezzar,  who  was  in  the 
flower  of  his  youth,  and  sent  him  against  the  rebel. 
And  when  Nebuchadnezzar  had  fallen  in  with  him, 
and  engaged  him  in  battle,  he  defeated  him,  and  from 
this  beginning  proceeded  to  bring  the  country  under 
his  own  rule.  Now  it  chanced  that  his  father,  Nabo- 
polassar, just  at  this  time  fell  sick,  and  departed  this 
life,  having  reigned  one-and-twenty  years.  Nebuchad- 
nezzar shortly  after  heard  of  his  father's  decease,  and, 
having  arranged  the  affairs  of  Egypt  and  the  other 
countries,  and  appointed  certain  of  his  friends  to  con- 
duct to  Babylon  the  captives  which  he  had  taken  from 
the  Jews,  the  Phoenicians,  the  Syrians,  and  the  parts 
about  Egypt,  together  with  the  heavy-armed  troops 
and  the  baggage,  started  himself  with  a  very  small 
escort,  and,  travelling  by  the  way  of  the  wilderness, 
reached  Babylon. 

"  The  word  of  the  Lord  that  came  to  Jeremiah  the  prophet  against 
the  Philistines,  before  that  Pharaoh  smote  Gaza.  Thus  saith  the  Lord, 
Behold,  waters  rise  up  out  of  the  north,  and  shall  be  an  overflowing 
flood,  and  shall  overflow  the  land,  and  all  that  is  therein ;  the  city  and 

1  Fr.  14  in  the  "  Fr.  Hist.  Gr."  of  C.  Muller,  vol.  ii.,  p.  506. 


NOTICES  IN  JEREMIAH  AND  EZEKIEL.         295 

them  that  dwell  therein ;  then  the  men  shall  cry,  and  all  the  inhabitants 
of  the  land  shall  howl.  At  the  noise  of  the  stamping  of  the  hoofs  of 
his  strong  horses,  at  the  rushing  of  his  chariots,  and  at  the  rumbling  of 
his  wheels,  the  fathers  shall  not  look  back  to  their  children  for  feeble- 
ness of  hands ;  because  of  the  day  that  cometh  to  spoil  all  the  Philis- 
tines, and  to  cut  off  from  Tyrus  and  Zidon  every  helper  that  remaineth ; 
for  the  Lord  will  spoil  the  Philistines,  the  remnant  of  the  country  of 
Caphtor.  Baldness  is  come  upon  Gaza ;  Ashkelon  is  cut  off  with  the 
remnant  of  their  valley  :  how  long  wilt  thou  cut  thyself?  O  thou  sword 
of  the  Lord,  how  long  will  it  be  ere  thou  be  quiet  ?  Put  up  thyself  into 
thy  scabbard ;  rest  and  be  still.  How  can  it  be  quiet,  seeing  the  Lord 
hath  given  it  a  charge  against  Ashkelon,  and  against  the  sea-shore  ? 
There  hath  He  appointed  it."-— Jer.  xlvii.  I-7. 

We  are,  first  of  all,  informed  here  that  a  certain 
prophecy  was  delivered,  "  before  that  Pharaoh  smote 
Gaza."  In  this  statement  it  is  implied  that,  at  some 
date  in  the  ministry  of  Jeremiah,  the  strong  Philistine 
town  of  Gaza  (Jud.  xvi.  1-3)  was  taken  by  a  king  of 
Egypt.  Now  the  kings  of  Egypt  contemporary  with 
Jeremiah's  ministry  would  seem  to  have  been  Psamatik 
I.,  Neko,  Psamatik  II.,  and  Uaphra  or  "  Pharaoh- 
Hophra."  Does  it  appear  from  profane  sources  that 
Gaza  was  besieged  and  taken  by  any  one  of  these 
monarchs  ? 

This  question  may  be  answered  in  the  affirmative. 
Herodotus  tells  us  that  after  the  battle  of  Magdolum 
(Megiddo),  Neko  took  "  Kadytis,"  a  large  city  in 
Syria.^  This  Kadytis  he  afterwards  describes  as  lying 
upon  the  coast  between  Phoenicia  and  Lake  Serbonis.^ 
It  was  at  one  time  identified  with  Jerusalem,  because 

1  Herod.,  ii.  159.  2  jbid.,  iii.  5. 


296  BAB  YL  ON  AND  E  G  YPT. 

the  Arabs  call  that  city  "  Al  Kods  " — "  the  Holy  "  ; 
and  more  recently  it  has  been  conjectured  to  represent 
the  Hittite  city  of  "  Cadesh  "  on  the  Orontes ;  ^  but  its 
position  on  or  near  the  sea  militates  against  both  these 
hypotheses.  Gaza  is  called  "  Gazetu  "  in  the  hiero- 
glyphical  inscriptions  of  Egypt,^  and  "  Khazitu  "  in 
the  cuneiform  inscriptions  of  Assyria,  of  which  forms 
"  Kadytis  "  is  a  fair  rendering.  Hence  recent  editors 
of  Herodotus  regard  it  as  "  plain  "  that  the  Kadytis, 
which  he  says  that  Neko  took,  was  Gaza.^ 

It  is  doubtful  whether  the  remainder  of  the  prophecy 
refers  in  any  way  to  Egypt.  The  "  waters  that  rise  up 
out  of  the  north  "  are  usually  taken  by  the  commen- 
tators for  the  army  of  Nebuchadnezzar,  either  when 
he  invaded  Syria  after  the  battle  of  Carchemish  (b.  c. 
605),  or  subsequently  when  he  advanced  to  the  sieges 
of  Jerusalem  and  Tyre  (b.c.  598).  The  description  in 
ver.  3  would  suit  a  Babylonian  army  as  well  as  an 
Egyptian,  and  the  characteristic  of  "  noise  "  seems  to 
belong  to  Babylon  especially  (chs.  iv.  29;  viii.  16; 
Ezek.  xxvi.  10).  There  is  not,  however,  any  distinct 
evidence  that  Nebuchadnezzar  at  any  time  led  a  hostile 
expedition  into  Philistia,  while  we  know  of  Neko  that 
he  did  so ;  and  as  his  expedition  seems  to  have  been 
made  on  his  return  from  Carchemish,  his  army  would 
on  this  occasion  have  "  risen  up  out  of  the  north  " 

^Lenormant,  "Manuel  d'Histoire  Ancienne,"  vol.  ii.,  p.  391. 
'^''Records  of   the  Past,"   vol.   ii.,  p.   115;    Brugseh,  «*Geschichte 
CEgyptens,"  p.  295. 

^  Sayce,  "Ancient  Empires,"  American  Edition,  p.  55. 


NOTICES  IN  JEREMIAH  AND  EZEKIEL.         297 

(ver.  2).  The  note  of  time  in  ver.  i  is  also  more  apposite 
if  Neko's  expedition  is  intended,  since  the  prophet 
would  then  have  inserted  the  date,  in  order  to  draw- 
attention  to  the  fact  that  his  prophecy  of  a  great  inva- 
sion of  Philistia  was  delivered  before  the  event. 

"  And  King  Zedekiah,  the  son  of  Josiah,  reigned  instead  of  Coniah, 
the  son  of  Jehoiakim.  .  .  .  Then  Pharaoh's  army  was  come  forth  out 
of  Egypt;  and  when  the  Chaldaeans  that  besieged  Jerusalem  heard 
tidings  of  them,  they  departed  from  Jerusalem.  Then  came  the  word 
of  the  Lord  unto  the  prophet  Jeremiah,  saying.  Thus  saith  the  Lord, 
the  God  of  Israel,  Thus  shall  ye  say  unto  the  king  of  Judah,  that  sent 
you  to  inquire  of  me,  Behold,  Pharaoh's  army,  which  is  come  forth  to 
help  you,  shall  return  to  Egypt  into  their  own  land.  And  the  Chal- 
dseans  shall  come  again,  and  fight  against  this  city,  and  take  it,  and 
burn  it  with  fire." — Jer.  xxxvii.  i-io. 

"  He  (Zedekiah)  rebelled  against  him  (Nebuchadnezzar)  in  sending 
his  ambassadors  into  Egypt,  that  they  might  give  him  horses  and  much 
people.  Shall  he  prosper  ?  Shall  he  escape  that  doeth  such  things  ? 
Or  shall  he  break  the  covenant,  and  be  delivered  ?  As  I  live,  saith  the 
Lord,  surely  in  the  place  v/here  the  king  dwelleth  that  made  him  king, 
whose  oath  he  despised,  even  with  him  in  the  midst  of  Babylon  he 
shall  die.  Neither  shall  Pharaoh  with  his  mighty  army  and  great 
company  make  for  him  in  the  war,  by  casting  mounts  and  building 
forts,  to  cut  off  many  persons." — Ezek.  xvii.  15-17. 

The  Pharaoh  contemporary  with  the  later  years  of 
Zedekiah,  the  last  king  of  Judah,  who  reigned  from 
B.C.  597  to  B.C.  586,  was  undoubtedly  Ua-ap-ra,^  whom 
the  Greeks  called  "  Apries,"^  and  whom  Jeremiah  in 

1  Brugsch  ("  Geschichte  CEgyptens,"  p.  734)  gives  the  name  as 
«  Uah-ab-ra,"  Birch  ("Egypt  from  the  Earliest  Times,"  p.  180)  as 
«'  Uah-hap-ra." 

2  Herod.,  ii.  161 ;  Diod.  Sic,  i.  68.  Manetho,  however,  calls  him 
«« Uaphris." 


298  BAB YL ON  AND  EGYPT. 

one  place  speaks  of  as  "  Pharaoh-Hophra  "  (ch.  xliv. 
30).  Apries  ascended  the  throne  in  B.C.  591,  and 
reigned  alone  nineteen  years  (to  B.C.  572),  after  which 
he  was  for  six  years  more  joint-king  with  Amasis.^  It 
would  seem  that  very  soon  after  his  accession  Zede- 
kiah  made  overtures  to  him  for  an  alliance  (Ezek.  xvii. 
15),  transferring  to  him  the  allegiance  which  he  owed 
to  Babylon,  and  making  a  request  for  a  large  body  of 
troops,  horse  and  foot  (ibid.).  It  is  in  accordance  with 
the  bold  and  aggressive  character  assigned  to  Apries 
by  the  Greeks^  to  find  that  he  at  once  accepted  Zede- 
kiah's  offer,  and  prepared  to  bear  his  part  in  the  war. 
"  Pharaoh's  army  went  forth  out  of  Egypt "  (Jer. 
xxxvii.  5)  with  the  object  of  "helping"  Zedekiah 
(ibid.  ver.  7) ;  and  the  movement  was  so  far  successful 
that  the  army  of  the  Chaldaeans,  which  had  commenced 
the  siege  of  Jerusalem,  **  broke  up  from  before  it  for 
fear  of  Pharaoh's  army  "  (ibid.  ver.  11).  Nebuchad- 
nezzar, who  was  directing  the  siege,  marched  away  to 
encounter  the  Egyptians,  and  either  terrified  them  into 
a  retreat,  or  actually  engaged  and  defeated  them.^  The 
foundation  was  thus  laid  of  that  enmity  between  the 
two  kings  which,  later  in  Egyptian  history,  is  found  to 
have  had  very  important  consequences.  Apries,  for 
the  time,  submitted,  and  led  his  army  back  within  his 
own  frontier,  leaving  the  unfortunate  Jewish  monarch 
to  his  fate. 

*  Wiedemann,  "  Geschichte  CEgyptens,"  p.  121. 
2  Herod.  1.  s.  c. ;  Diod.  Sic,  1.  s.  c, 

*  So  Josephus,  "  Ant.  Jud.,*'  x,  7,  |  3. 


NOTICES  IN  JEREiMIAH  AND  EZEKIEL.         299 

"  Then  came  the  word  of  the  Lord  unto  Jeremiah  in  Tahpanhes, 
saying,  Take  great  stones  in  thine  hand,  and  hide  them  in  the  clay  in 
the  brick-kiln,  which  is  at  the  entry  of  Pharaoh's  house  in  Tahpanhes, 
in  the  sight  of  the  men  of  Judah  ;  and  say  unto  them,  Thus  saith  the 
Lord  of  hosts,  the  God  of  Israel,  Behold,  I  will  send  and  take  Nebu- 
chadnezzar, the  king  of  Babylon,  my  servant,  and  will  set  his  throne 
upon  these  stones  that  I  have  hid;  and  he  shall  spread  his  royal 
pavilion  over  them.  And  when  he  cometh,  he  shall  smite  the  land  of 
Egypt,  and  deliver  such  as  are  for  death  to  death ;  and  such  as  are  for 
captivity  to  captivity;  and  such  as  are  for  the  sword  to  the  sword. 
And  I  will  kindle  a  fire  in  the  houses  of  the  gods  of  Egypt;  and 
he  shall  burn  them,  and  carry  them  away  captives;  and  he  shall 
array  himself  with  the  land  of  Egypt,  as  a  shepherd  putteth  on  his 
garment ;  and  he  shall  go  forth  from  thence  in  peace.  He  shall  break 
also  the  images  of  Beth-shemesh,  that  is  in  the  land  of  Egypt ;  and 
the  houses  of  the  gods  of  the  Egyptians  shall  he  burn  with  fire." — 
Jer.  xliii.  8-13. 

"  The  word  that  the  Lord  spake  to  Jeremiah  the  prophet,  how  Neb- 
uchadnezzar, king  of  Babylon,  should  come  and  smite  the  land  of 
Egypt.  Declare  ye  in  Egypt,  and  publish  in  Migdol,  and  publish  in 
Noph  and  in  Tahpanhes ;  say  ye.  Stand  fast,  and  prepare  thee ;  for  the 
sword  shall  devour  round  about  thee.  Why  are  thy  valiant  men  swept 
away  ?  They  stood  not  because  the  Lord  did  drive  them.  He  made 
many  to  fall ;  yea,  one  fell  upon  another ;  and  they  said,  Arise,  and  let 
us  go  again  to  our  own  people  and  to  the  land  of  our  nativity  from  the 
oppressing  sword.  They  did  cry  there,  Pharaoh,  king  of  Egypt,  is  but  a 
noise;  he  hath  passed  the  time  appointed.  .  .  .  Othou  daughter  dwell- 
ing in  Egypt,  furnish  thyself  to  go  into  captivity ;  for  Noph  shall  be  waste 
and  desolate  without  an  inhabitant.  Egypt  is  like  a  very  fair  heifer ; 
but  destruction  cometh ;  it  cometh  out  of  the  north.  Also  her  hired 
men  are  in  the  midst  of  her  like  fatted  bullocks ;  for  they  also  are 
turned  back  and  are  fled  away  together;  they  did  not  stand,  because  the 
day  of  their  calamity  was  come  upon  them,  and  the  time  of  their  visi- 
tation. .  .  .  The  Lord  of  hosts,  the  God  of  Israel  saith,  Behold,  I  will 
punish  the  multitude  of  No,  and  Pharaoh,  and  Eg}'pt,  with  their  gods, 
and  their  kings ;  even  Pharaoh,  and  all  them  that  trust  in  him ;  and  I 
v/ill  deliver  them  into  the  hand  of  those  that  seek  their  lives,  and  into 


30O 


BAB  YL ON  AND  EG  YPT. 


the  hand  of  Nebuchadnezzar,  king  of  Babylon,  and  into  the  hand  of 
his  servants  :  and  afterward  it  shall  be  inhabited,  as  in  the  days  of  old, 
saith  the  Lord." — Jer.  xlvi.  13-26. 

On  the  fact  of  there  having  been  at  least  one  in- 
vasion of  Egypt  by  Nebuchadnezzar  subsequently 
to  his  capture  of  Jerusalem  in  b.  c.  586,  it  is  only 
necessary  to  refer  the  reader  to  Chapter  VII.  of  this 
work.  It  was  there  shown  that  two  wholly  inde- 
pendent documents,  one  Egyptian,  the  other  Baby- 
lonian, prove  the  invasion  to  have  taken  place,  while 
the  Egyptian  one,  though  seeking  to  minimize  the  suc- 
cess of  the  invaders,  necessarily  implies  an  occupation 
of  the  whole  of  Egypt.  The  general  Hor,  who  is 
"  governor  of  the  regions  of  the  south,"  admits  that 
the  Asiatics  penetrated  to  the  extreme  southern  border 
of  Egypt  (comp.  Ezek.  xxix.  10;  xxx.  6),  and  claims 
credit  for  not  having  "  let  them  adv^ance  quite  into 
Nubia."  ^  His  account  of  his  careful  restoration  of 
the  temple  of  Kneph  at  Elephantine  ^  indicates  that  it 
had  suffered  damage  at  the  hands  of  the  invaders,  and 
is  a  comment  on  the  expression  "  the  houses  of  the 
gods  of  the  Egyptians  shall  he  burn  with  fire  "  (Jer. 
xliii.  13).  The  representation  of  the  army  by  which 
Egypt  was  defended  as  one  of  "  hired "  men  (ibid, 
xlvi.  21),  who  said  one  to  another,  when  they  were 
defeated,  "  Arise,  and  let  us  go  again  to  our  own  people 
and  to  the  land  of  our  nativity  from  the  oppressing 
sword"  (ibid.  ver.   16),  accords  well  with  all  that  we 

* "  Records  of  the  Past,"  vol.  vi.,  p.  83. 
2  Ibid.,  p.  82,  lines  25,  36,  40. 


NOTICES  IN  JEREMIAH  AND  EZEKIEL.         301 

know  of  the  Egyptian  military  force  of  the  time,  which 
consisted,  not  of  native  soldiers,  but  of  foreign  mer- 
cenaries, Ethiopians,  Libyans,  Carians,  and  Greeks.^ 
The  date  of  the  expedition,  Nebuchadnezzar's  thirty- 
seventh  year,^  or  b.c.  568,  falls  exactly  into  the  time 
when  Apries  and  Amasis  were  joint-kings  of  Egypt, 
and  explains  the  apparent  discrepancy  between  the  two 
documents,  one  of  which  speaks  of  Apries  as  king, 
while  the  other  certainly  did  not  name  Apries,  and 
probably  named  Amasis.  ^  The  conjoint  reign  would 
even  seem  to  be  indicated  by  the  mention  of  "  kings  " 
in  ch.  xlvi.  25. 

"  I  will  give  Pharaoh-Hophra,  king  of  Egypt,  into  the  hand  of  his 
enemies,  and  into  the  hand  of  them  that  seek  his  life,  as  I  gave  Zede- 
kiah,  king  of  Judah,  into  the  hand  of  Nebuchadnezzar,  king  of  Babylon, 
his  enemy,  and  that  sought  his  life." — Jer.  xl.  30. 

There  would  seem  to  be  no  doubt  that  this  prophecy 
was  fulfilled  to  the  letter,  and  that  Pharaoh-Hophra 
(Ua-apra)  fell  into  the  power  of  his  enemies  and  suf- 
fered a  violent  death.  But  it  is  not  altogether  clear 
who  these  enemies  were,  or  how  his  death  was  brought 
about.  Herodotus  relates*  that  the  reverses  which 
befell  him  arose  out  of  an  unsuccessful  expedition 
against  Cyrene,  in  which  Apries  was  thought  to  have 

1  Herod,  ii.  163  ;  Jer.  xlvi.  9,  etc. 

2 "  Transactions  of  Society  of  Biblical  Archaeology,"  vol.  vii.,  p.  222. 

3  The  name  is  partially  obliterated,  but  evidently  ended  in  -su.  The 
Egyptian  name  of  Amasis,  Aahmes,  terminated  in  s.  That  of  Apries, 
Ua-ap-ra,  contained  no  s. 

♦Herod.,  ii.,  161-163. 


302 


BAB  YLON  AND  EG  YPT. 


intentionally  sacrificed  the  lives  of  some  thousands  of 
his  soldiers.  A  mutiny  followed,  and  Amasis,  having 
been  sent  to  put  it  down,  was  induced  to  place  himself 
at  its  head.  The  result  was  a  civil  war,  in  which  the 
rebel  chief  was  successful.  Apries  fell  into  his  hands, 
and  was  at  first  treated  with  kindness,  allowed  to  in- 
habit the  royal  palace  ^  and  (we  must  suppose)  to  retain 
the  title  of  king.  But  after  six  years,  during  which 
both  monarchs  reigned,  but  Amasis  alone  governed, 
dissatisfaction  with  this  condition  of  things  showed 
itself  among  the  Egyptians,  who  persuaded  Amasis  to 
allow  them  to  put  Apries  to  death.  The  story  is  not, 
intrinsically,  very  probable ;  and  it  is  contradicted  by 
Josephus,  who  ascribes  the  execution  of  Apries  to 
Nebuchadnezzar.^  That  monarch  may  not  improbably 
have  borne  Apries  a  grudge  on  account  of  the  aid 
which  he  gave  to  Zedekiah,  and  also  of  his  aggressions 
upon  the  Phoenician  cities,^  and,  though  the  adversary 
with  whom  he  contended  in  the  field  may  have  been 
Amasis,  he  may  yet  have  let  his  main  vengeance  fall 
upon  Apries,  whom  he  no  doubt  looked  on  as  a 
rebel,  as  he  had  looked  upon  Neko/  Amasis  may 
have  obtained  easier  terms  of  peace  by  the  surrender 
of  his  fellow-king,  or  may  even  have  been  allowed  to 
retain  the  throne  in  consequence  of  his  complaisance. 
Most  probably  he  accepted  the  position  of  a  vassal 
monarch,  a  position  which  he  may  have  retained  until 
Nabonidus  was   threatened  by  Cyrus  (b.c.    547),   or 

1  Herod.,  ii.,  169.  2  "Ant.  Jud.,"  x.  9,  §  7. 

3  Herod.,  ii.  161  ;  Died.  Sic,  i.  68.  *  Berosus,  Fr.  14. 


NOTICES  IN  JEREMIAH  AND  EZEKIEL.         303 

even  until  the  fall  of  Babylon  in  B.C.  538.  During 
this  period  Egypt  was  a  **  base  kingdom  "  (Ezek.  xxix. 
14),  ''the  basest  of  the  kingdoms"  (ibid.  ver.  15),  if 
its  former  exaltation  was  kept  in  view. 


CHAPTER   XXIII. 

NOTICES   OF    EGYPT    IN    DANIEL. 

The  notices  of  Egypt  in  the  Book  of  Daniel  have  the 
peculiarity  that  they  are  absolutely  and  entirely  pro- 
phetical Daniel  is  not  individually  brought  into  any 
contact  with  Egypt ;  nor  does  Egypt  play  any  part  in 
the  stirring  events  of  the  time  wherein  he  lives. 
Egypt  had,  in  fact,  fallen  to  the  rank  of  a  very  second- 
rate  power  after  the  battle  of  Carchemish  (b.  c.  605), 
and  counted  for  little  in  the  political  struggles  of  the 
time,  which  had  for  their  locality  the  great  Iranian 
plateau,  together  with  the  broad  valley  of  the  Tigris 
and  the  Euphrates.  Daniel,  who  was  contemporary, 
as  he  tells  us  (chs.  i.-vL),  with  Nebuchadnezzar,  Bel- 
shazzar,  Darius  the  Mede,  and  Cyrus  the  Great,  must 
have  died  about  B.C.  534,  or  at  any  rate  before  B.C. 
529 — the  year  of  Cyrus'  decease.  His  notices  of 
Egypt  belong  to  a  date  more  than  two  centuries  later. 
It  is  given  him  to  see  in  vision  a  sort  of  sketch  of  the 
history  of  the  world  from  his  own  time  to  the  coming 
of  the  Kingdom  of  the  Messiah ;  and  in  this  "Apoca- 
lyptic Vision,"  or  rather  series  of  visions,  the  future 
of  Egypt  is  placed  before  him,  in  some  detail,  during 
304 


NOTICES  IN  DANIEL.  305 

a  space  of  some  century  and  a  half,  from  about  B.C. 
323  to  about  B.C.  168. 

It  is  scarcely  necessary  to  say  that  the  genuineness 
and  authenticity  of  the  entire  Book  of  Daniel  have 
been  fiercely  assailed,  both  in  remote  times  and  in  our 
own  day.  But  the  arguments  of  the  assailants  have 
never  been  regarded  as  of  any  weight  by  the  Church ; 
and  the  Book  has  maintained  its  place  in  the  Canon 
through  all  ecclesiastical  ages  and  throughout  Chris- 
tendom. It  is  impossible  in  a  volume  like  the  present 
to  enter  into  this  great  controversy,  which  has 
employed  the  pens  of  more  than  twenty  critics  of 
repute  during  the  present  century,  and  which  cannot 
be  said  to  have  been  set  at  rest  even  by  the  admirable 
labours  of  Auberlen,  Hengstenberg,  and  Pusey.  We 
shall  here,  of  necessity,  assume  the  genuineness  and 
authenticity  of  the  Book,  and  especially  of  the  chapter 
(ch.  xi.)  which  bears  upon  the  history  of  Egypt ;  we 
shall  regard  it,  not  as  a  vaticiniiim  post  eventum — 
the  composition  of  a  nameless  author  in  the  time  of 
Antiochus  Epiphanes — ^but  as  the  genuine  utterance 
of  Daniel  himself  in  the  year  to  which  he  assigns  it — 
"  the  first  year  of  Darius  the  Mede  "  (ch.  xi.  i),  or  B.C. 
538-7.  As  the  prophecy  is  too  long  to  be  conveni- 
ently treated  as  a  whole,  we  shall  break  it  up  into 
portions,  and  endeavour  to  show  how  far  its  various 
parts  are  confirmed  or  illustrated  by  profane  authors. 

«  Now  I  will  shew  thee  the  truth.  Behold,  there  shall  stand  up  yet 
three  kings  in  Persia ;  and  the  fourth  shall  be  far  richer  than  they  all ; 
and  by  his  strength  through  his  riches  he  shall  stir  up  all  against  the 


3o6  BAB  YL ON  AND  EG  YPT. 

realm  of  Giecia.  And  a  mighty  king  shall  stand  up,  that  sh^all  rule  with 
great  dominion,  and  do  according  to  his  will,  and  when  he  shall  stand 
up,  his  kingdom  shall  be  broken,  and  shall  be  divided  toward  the 
four  winds  of  heaven ;  and  not  to  his  posterity,  nor  according  to  the 
dominion  which  he  ruled ;  for  his  kingdom  shall  be  plucked  up, 
even  for  others  beside  those." — Dan.  xi.  2-4. 

This  first  section  of  the  prophecy  has  no  direct 
bearing  upon  Egypt.  Its  object  is  to  bridge  the  inter- 
val between  the  date  of  the  vision  and  the  point  at 
which  the  history  of  Egypt  is  to  be  taken  up.  The 
date  of  the  vision  is  B.C.  538-7,  the  first  year  of  Darius 
the  Mede  in  Babylon,  and  the  first  of  Cyrus  (by  whom 
Darius  had  been  set  up)  in  Persia.  Egyptian  history 
is  to  be  taken  up  from  b.  c.  323,  at  which  point,  after 
a  long  period  of  subjection  to  Persia,  Egypt  became 
once  more  an  independent  and  important  kingdom. 
What  are  to  be  the  main  events,  the  great  land-marks, 
of  the  interval  ?  The  angel  who  speaks  to  Daniel 
thus  enumerates  them,  (i)  There  will  be  three  kings 
in  Persia,  followed  by  a  fourth  richer  and  stronger 
than  any  of  them,  who  will  lead  a  great  expedition 
into  Greece.  (2)  A  mighty  king  will  stand  up,  greater 
apparently  then  even  the  Persian  kings,  who  will  "  rule 
with  great  dominion,  and  do  according  to  his  will." 
(3)  After  this  king  has  "  stood  up  "  for  a  while,  his 
kingdom  will  be  broken,  "  divided  toward  the  four 
winds  of  heaven,"  not  descending  to  his  posterity, 
either  as  a  whole,  or  in  any  of  its  fragments,  but  fall- 
ing into  the  hands  of  '*  others  beside  those,"  i.  ^.,  of 
persons  not  his  descendants.      Now,  profane  history 


NOTICES  IN  DANIEL.  307 

relates  ^  that  three  kings  ruled  in  Persia  after  Cyrus  the 
Great,  viz.,  Cambyses  (from  b.  c.  529  to  b.  c.  522),  Bardes 
or  Smerdis  (during  seven  months  of  B.C.  522),  and 
Darius, the  son  of  Hystaspes  (from  b. c.  521  to  B.C. 486); 
and  that  these  were  then  followed  by  Xerxes,  the  son  of 
Darius,^  under  whom  Persia  was  at  the  height  of  its 
power  and  prosperity,  until  in  his  fifth  year  he  "  stirred 
up  all  against  the  realm  of  Grecia,"  and  made  that  great 
expedition,  which  still  remains  one  of  the  most  marvel- 
lous events  in  the  world's  entire  history.  This  expe- 
dition fell  into  B.  c.  480,  and  was  followed  by  a  gradual 
diminution  of  Persian  power,  and  by  wars  of  no  great 
moment,  until,  in  b.c  335,  a  "  mighty  king"  stood  up, 
viz.,  Alexander  the  Great,  who  ruled  a  greater  dominion 
than  had  been  held  by  any  previous  monarch,  since  it 
reached  from  the  Adriatic  to  the  Sutlej,  and  from  the 
Danube  to  Syene.  The  wide  sovereignty  and  auto- 
cratic pride  of  Alexander  are  well  expressed  by  the 
words  "  that  shall  rule  with  great  dominion  and  do 
according  to  his  will"  (ver.  3) ;  for  Alexander  brooked 
no  restraint,  and  was  practically  a  more  absolute  despot 
than  any  Persian  king  had  ever  been.  At  his  death, 
as  is  well  known,  his  kingdom  was  *'  broken  up." 
Though  he  left  behind  him  an  illegitimate  son,  Hercu- 
les, and  had  also  a  posthumous  child  by  Roxana, 
called  Alexander,  yet  neither  of  these  ever  succeeded 
to  any  portion  of  his  dominions.     These  fell  at  first  to 

^  See  especially  Herod.,  ii.   I ;  iii.  67,  88,  confirmed  by  the  Behistun 
inscription. 

2  Herod,  vii.  4  et  seqq. 


3o8  BAB  YL  ON  AND  E  G  YPT. 

the  ten  generals,  Ptolemy,  Pithon,  Antigonus,  Eumenes, 
Leonnatus,  Lysimachus,  Menander,  Asander,  Philotas, 
Laomedon,  and  ultimately  to  Ptolemy,  Seleucus,  Anti- 
pater,  Antigonus,  Eumenes^  Clitus,  and  Cassander. 

"  And  the  king  of  the  south  shall  be  strong,  and  one  of  his  princes 
[and  he]  shall  be  strong  above  him,  and  have  dominion  ;  his  dominion 
shall  be  a  great  dominion.  And  in  the  end  of  years  they  shall  join 
themselves  together ;  for  the  king's  daughter  of  the  south  shall  come  to 
the  king  of  the  north  to  make  an  a.greement ;  but  she  shall  not  retain 
the  power  of  the  arm ;  neither  shall  he  stand,  nor  his  ann ;  but  she 
shall  be  given  up  and  they  that  brought  her,  and  he  that  begat  her,  and 
he  that  strengthened  her  in  these  times."     (Dan.  xi.  5,  6.) 

That  the  King  of  Egypt  is  meant  by  "  the  King  of 
the  South "  might  be  presumed  from  the  fact  that 
Egypt  formed  the  most  southern  portion  of  the 
dominions  of  Alexander;^  but  it  is  placed  beyond 
dispute  or  cavil  by  the  mention  of  Egypt  as  the 
country  to  which  the  King  of  the  South  carried  his 
captives,  in  verse  8.  Profane  history  shows  us  that, 
after  the  death  of  Alexander  (b.  c.  323),  Ptolemy  Lagi, 
who  had  governed  Egypt  as  Alexander's  lieutenant, 
from  its  conquest  (b.c.  332)  assumed  the  regal  autho- 
rity, and  after  a  little  time  the  regal  name,  in  that 
country,  and  ruled  it  from  B.C.  323  to  B.C.  283 — a 
space  of  forty  years.^  He  is  justly  characterised  as 
**  strong,"  since  he  was  able  to   enlarge   his   original 

^  The  mouths  of  the  Indus  are  about  parallel  with  the  most  southern 
portion  of  Egypt,  but  though  visited  by  Alexander,  they  can  hardly  be 
regarded  as  within  his  permanent  dominions. 

^Grote,  "History  of  Greece,"  vol.  viii.,  p.  533;  Heeren,  "Manual 
of  Ancient  History,"  p.  249. 


NO  TICKS  IN  DA NIEL.  309 

territories  by  the  addition  of  Phoenicia,  Palestine, 
Cyprus,  and  the  Cyrenaica;  and,  though  he  was  some- 
times defeated,  he  was  upon  the  whole  one  of  the  most 
warlike  and  successful  of  the  princes  among  whom 
Alexander's  kingdom  was  partitioned.  Another, 
however,  of  the  princes  is  truly  said  to  have  been 
''strong  above  him."  The  Syrian  was  undoubtedly 
the  greatest  of  the  kingdoms  into  which  the  Mace- 
donian monarchy  became  broken  up ;  and  Seleucus 
Nicator,  its  first  ruler,  was  a  more  powerful  sovereign 
than  Ptolemy  Lagi.  Seleucus  ruled  from  the  Medi- 
terranean to  the  Indus  and  from  the  Jaxartes  to  the 
Indian  Ocean,  having  thus  a  territory  five  or  six  times 
as  large  as  that  of  Ptolemy.  His  dominion  was 
emphatically  "  a  great  dominion."  It  was  the  repre- 
sentative in  Western  Asia  of  the  Great  Monarchy 
which  had  existed  in  that  region  from  4:he  time  of 
Nimrod,  and  exceeded  in  dimensions  every  such  mon- 
archy except  the  Persian.  Seleucus  and  Ptolemy 
Lagi  maintained  on  the  whole  friendly  relations ;  and 
the  struggle  between  the  kings  of  the  north  and  of  the 
south  was  deferred  to  the  reigns  of  their  successors. 

Daniel's  statement  that  "  in  the  end  of  years  "  the 
kings  of  the  north  and  of  the  south  "  shall  join  them- 
selves together "  implies  a  previous  rupture  and 
struggle,  which  is  found  to  have  taken  place  in  the 
reigns  of  Ptolemy  II.  (Philadelphus)  and  Antiochus 
Soter.  A  permanent  jealousy,  and  many  occasional 
causes  of  quarrel,  set  the  two  powers  in  hostility  the 
one  to  the  other;  and  in  B.C.  269  Antiochus  made  an 


3IO  BAB  YL  ON  AND  E G  YPT. 


expedition  against  Egypt,  which  resulted  in  complete 
failure/  leaving  a  stain  on  the  Syrian  arms  which  it 
was  regarded  as  necessary  to  efface.  Antiochus  II. 
(Theus)  consequently  renewed  the  war  in  b.  c.  260,  and 
a  long  contest  followed  without  any  very  decided 
advantage  to  either  side,  until,  in  B.C.  250,  negotiations 
for  peace  were  set  on  foot — the  two  kings  "  associated 
themselves"  (marginal  rendering),  and  in  the  following 
year  (b.  c.  269)  it  was  arranged  that  Ptolemy  II.  should 
give  his  daughter,  Berenice,  in  marriage  to  Antiochus 
Theus,  who  repudiated  his  previous  wife,  Laodice,  in 
order  to  make  way  for  her.^  The  wedding  took  place  ; 
and  thus  "  the  king's  daughter  of  the  south  came  to 
the  king  of  the  north  to  make  (i.  e.,  cement)  an  agree- 
ment" (verse  6).  But  the  well-meant  attempt  at  peace 
failed.  In  B.C.  247,  on  the  death  of  Ptolemy  II., 
Antiochus  Theus  repudiated  his  Egyptian  wife,  and 
recalled  Laodice,  who  shortly  poisoned  her  husband, 
and  caused  Berenice  also  to  be  put  to  death.  ^  Thus 
this  princess  "  did  not  retain  the  power  of  the  arm  " 
(/.  e.,  the  secular  authority)  ;  neither  did  her  husband 
retain  his  power,  or  "stand."  The  attempted  arrange- 
ment entirely  fell  through.  Berenice  herself  and  her 
son  ("  he  whom  she  brought  forth,"  marginal  rendering) 
suffered  death  ;  and  the  entire  party  concerned  in  the 
transaction  were  discredited  and  placed  under  a  cloud. 

^  Heeren,  p.  236 ;  Smith,  "  Diet,  of  Greek  and  Roman  Biography," 
vol.  iii.,  p.  586. 

=^  Hieronym.  ed.  Dan.  xi.  6;  Polyb.  v.  18,  \  10 ;  Athen.  "  Deipn." 
ii.,  p.  45. 

^  Heeren,  1.  s.  c. 


NOTICES  IN  DANIEL. 


311 


"  But  out  of  a  branch  of  her  roots  shall  one  stand  up  in  his  estate, 
which  shall  come  with  an  araiy,  and  shall  enter  into  the  fortress  of  the 
king  of  the  north,  and  shall  deal  against  them,  and  shall  prevail ;  and 
shall  also  carry  captives  into  Egypt  their  gods,  with  their  princes,  and 
with  their  precious  vessels  of  silver  and  of  gold;  and  he  shall  continue 
more  years  than  the  king  of  the  north."     (Dan.  xi.  7,  8.) 

There  are  some  errors  of  translation  in  this  passage 
which  require  to  be  removed  before  its  statements  can 
be  properly  compared  with  those  of  profane  historians. 
Modern  criticism  thus  renders  the  passage :  ^  *'  But  a 
branch  of  her  roots  shall  rise  up  in  his  place,  which  shall 
come  against  the  host,  and  enter  into  the  strong  places 
of  the  king  of  the  north,  and  shall  deal  against  them,  and 
shall  prevail ;  and  shall  also  carry  captive  into  Egypt 
their  gods,  with  their  images,  and  with  their  precious 
vessels  of  silver  and  of  gold,  and  [then]  for  some  years 
he  shall  stand  aloof  from  the  king  of  the  north." 
History  tells  us  that  a  branch  from  the  same  roots  as 
Berenice,  her  brother  Ptolemy  Euergetes,  in  the  year 
after  her  murder  (b.  c.  245),  made  war  upon  Seleucus 
11.  (Callinicus),  the  son  of  Antiochus  Theus  and 
Laodice,  who  was  implicated  in  the  bloody  deed,  and, 
having  invaded  Syria,  made  himself  master  of  vari- 
ous "strong  places"  in  the  country,  as  especially 
of  Seleucia  near  Antioch,  a  most  important  city.^ 
He  "  prevailed "  in  the  wars  most  completely, 
capturing  Antioch,  and  reducing  to  temporary  sub- 
jection the  whole  of  the    Eastern   provinces — Meso- 

1  See  the  "  Speaker's  Commentar)^"  vol.  vi.,  pp.  374,  375. 
2Polyb.,  v.  58,  I  II. 


312  BAB  YL  ON  AND  E G  YPT. 

potamia,  Babylonia,  Susiana,  Media,  and  Persia.^  He 
stated  in  an  inscription  which  he  set  up  at  Adule, 
that  among  the  treasures  which  he  carried  off  from 
Asia  were  holy  relics  {Itpa)  removed  from  Egypt  by 
the  Persians,^  and  no  doubt,  together  with  these,  he 
would,  like  other  conquerors,  include  in  his  booty  the 
"  gods  and  images  "  of  the  defeated  nations.  After 
the  war  had  lasted  four  years,  Euergetes  "  stood 
aloof"  from  the  king  of  the  north,  consenting,  on 
account  of  some  internal  troubles  in  his  own  dominions, 
to  conclude  a  truce  with  Callinicus  for  ten  years. 

"  But  his  sons  shall  be  stirred  up,  and  shall  assemble  a  multitude  of 
great  forces;  and  one  shall  certainly  come,  and  overflow,  and  pass 
through ;  then  shall  he  return,  and  be  stirred  up,  even  to  his  fortress. 
And  the  king  of  the  south  shall  be  moved  with  choler,  and  shall  come 
forth  and  fight  with  him,  even  with  the  king  of  the  north :  and  he  shall 
set  forth  a  great  multitude ;  but  the  multitude  shall  be  given  into  his 
hand.  And  when  he  hath  taken  away  the  multitude,  his  heart  shall  be 
lifted  up;  and  he  shall  cast  down  many  ten  thousands ;  but  he  shall  not 
be  strengthened  by  it."     (Dan.  xi.  10-12.) 

The  construction  of  the  Hebrew  is  such  as  to 
render  it  uncertain,  whose  sons  are  intended  in  the 
opening  clause  of  this  passage,  whether  those  of  the 
king  of  the  north  or  of  the  south.  The  nexus,  how- 
ever, of  the  clause  with  those  that  follow  makes  it 
tolerably  clear  that  the  attack  this  time  is  on  the  part 
of  the  northern  monarch,  against  whom  the  king  of 
the  south  *'  comes  forth,  moved  with  choler  "  (verse 

*  See  the  "  Inscription  of  Adule,"  quoted  by  Clinton  (**  Fasti  Helli- 
nici,"  vol.  iii.,  page  383,  note). 
2  Ibid. 


NO  TICES  IN  DANIEL.  3 1 3 


11),  anxious  to  repel  what  he  regards  as  an  unpro- 
voked assault.  Now  Callinicus  had  two  sons,  who 
reigned  one  after  the  other — Seleucus  III.  (Ceraunus) 
from  B.C.  226  to  223,  and  Antiochus  III.  (the  Great) 
from  B.C.  223  to  187.  Of  these  the  elder,  Seleucus,  is 
said  by  Jerome  ^  to  have  invaded  Egypt  in  combi- 
nation with  his  brother,  Antiochus,  and  to  have  wa^ed 
a  war  with  Euergetes ;  but  the  silence  of  profane 
historians  throws  some  doubt  on  this  statement. 
"  One  "  of  the  sons,  however,  Antiochus  the  Great, 
most  *^  certainly,"  "  came,  and  overflowed,  and  passed 
through  "  the  territories  of  Egypt,  attacking  Ptolemy 
Philopator,  the  son  of  Euergetes,  with  great  vigour 
in  B.C.  219,  and  in  B.C.  218  repeatedly  defeating  his 
forces,  and  conquering  the  greater  part  of  Palestine, 
including  Samaria  and  Gilead.^  From  these  conquests 
he  "returned"  for  the  winter  to  "his  fortress"  of 
Ptolema'is,^  whence  he  made  great  efforts  to  have 
everything  in  readiness  for  a  further  attack  upon  his 
adversary  in  the  ensuing  year.  In  the  spring  he  set 
forth  on  his  march  southward,  passed  through  Gaza, 
and  encamped  at  Raphia  (now  Refah),  a  small  town 
near  the  coast,  on  the  road  to  Egypt.  ^  Meanwhile 
Philopator,  "  moved  with  choler,"  had  quitted  Alex- 
andria, at  the  head  of  an  army  of  75,000  men, 
supported  by  seventy-three  elephants,  and  had  marched 
to  Pelusium,  whence,  after  resting  a  few  days,  he 
proceeded  along  the  coast  to  Rhinocolura,  and  thence 

1 "  Comment,  in  Dan,,"  xi.  10.  2  polyb.,  v.  59-70. 

3  Ibid.,  V.  71,  §  II.  *  Ibid.,  V.  80,  §  4. 


314 


BABYLON  AND  EGYPT. 


toward  Raphia,  where  he  encamped  over  against  the 
army  of  Antiochus.  The  Syrian  forces  were  some- 
what less  numerous  than  his  own,  amounting  to  only 
68,000,  but  they  were  stronger  in  cavalry  and  in 
elephants.  After  some  unimportant  skirmishing,  the 
two  hosts  engaged  each  other ;  and  though  the  Syrian 
right  defeated  the  Eg^'ptian  left,  and  the  Asiatic  ele- 
phants of  Antiochus  proved  greatly  superior  to  the 
African  ones  of  his  adversary,  yet  the  battle  resulted 
in  a  decisive  victory  for  the  Egyptians,  who  slew  ten 
thousand  of  the  enemy,  and  took  above  four  thousand 
prisoners.^  The  Syrian  "  multitude"  was  thus  **  given 
into  Ptolemy's  hand,"  and  a  portion  of  it  "  taken 
away  "  into  Egypt.  His  victory  naturally  "  lifted  up" 
Ptolemy's  *'  heart ;"  he  was  greatly  elated,  and  is  said 
after  the  battle  to  have  "  abandoned  himself  to  a  life 
of  licentiousness.""  No  real  advantage  resulted  to 
him  from  his  having  "  cast  down  many  ten  thousands ;" 
the  Syrian  kingdom  remained  more  powerful  than  his 
own,  and  was  certain  to  revenge  the  defeat  of  Raphia 
when  a  favourable  opportunity  offered. 

"  The  king  of  the  north  shall  return,  and  shall  set  forth  a  multitude 
greater  than  the  former,  and  shall  certainly  come  after  certain  years 
with  a  great  army  and  with  much  riches.  And  in  those  times  shall 
there  many  stand  up  against  the  king  of  the  south ;  also  the  robbers  of 
thy  people  shall  exalt  themselves  to  establish  the  vision ;  but  they  shall 
fall.  So  the  king  of  the  north  shall  come  and  cast  up  a  mount  and 
take  the  most  fenced  cities,  and  the  arms  of  the  south  shall  not  with- 
stand, neither  his  chosen  people,  neither  shall  there  be  any  strength  to 
withstand.     But  he  that  cometh  against  him  shall  do  according  to  his 

^  Polyb.,  V.  81-86.         2  u  Speaker's  Commentary,"  vol.  vi.,  p,  376. 


NOTICES  IN  DANIEL.  315 


own  will,  and  none  shall  stand  before  him ;  and  he  shall  stand  in  the 
glorious  land,  which  by  his  hand  shall  be  consumed.  He  shall  also  set 
his  face  to  enter  with  the  strength  of  his  whole  kingdom,  and  upright 
ones  with  him ;  thus  shall  he  do ;  and  he  shall  give  him  the  daughter 
of  women,  corrupting  her ;  but  she  shall  not  stand  on  his  side,  neither 
be  for  him."     (Dan.  xi.  13-17.) 

In  B.  c.  204,  thirteen  years  after  the  battle  of  Raphia, 
Antiochus  the  Great  *'  returned  "  to  the  attack  upon 
Egypt.  Having  made  alhance  with  Phihp  III.  of 
Macedon,^  he  invaded  Caele-Syria  and  Palestine  with 
a  great  army,^  and  with  the  good  v/ill  of  the  inhab- 
itants, whom  the  cruelties  and  exactions  of  Philopator 
had  disgusted,  occupied  the  entire  region  to  the 
borders  of  Egypt — "  the  robbers  (rather  "  captains  ") 
of  the  Jewish  people  joining  with  him  to  establish  the 
vision."  A  turn  in  the  war  subjected  these  rebels  to 
the  vengeance  of  Ptolemy,  who  recovered  Jerusalem 
in  B.C.  200,  and  took  severe  measures  against  the 
inhabitants.^  Two  years  later  Antiochus  once  more 
gathered  his  forces,  and  marched  southward.  One 
after  another  the  strongholds  of  Syria  and  Palestine 
fell  into  his  hands.  "  The  arms  of  the  south  "  were 
not  able  to  "withstand"  him.^  At  Panias,  near  the 
sources  of  the  Jordan,  he  entirely  defeated  Scopas, 
the  chief  general  of  the  Egyptian  monarch  ;  ^  after 
which  he  besieged  him  in  Sidon,  which  he  took,  and  a 

^  Polyb.  XV.  20 ;  Liv.  xxxi.  14. 

2  Smith,  "  Diet,  of  the  Bible,"  vol.  i.,  p.  74. 

3  Joseph.,  "  Ant.  Jud.,"  xii.  3,  \  3. 

*  Appian,  ''  Syriaca,"  \  i  ;  Liv.  xxxiii.  19. 
5  Polyb.,  xvi.  18,  ^  2 ;  39,  ^  3  ;  Joseph.  1.  s.  c. 


3i6  BAB  YL  ON  AND  EC  YPT. 

little  later  re-took  Jerusalem.  He  then  "  completely 
established  himself  in  Palestine,"  occupying  the  glor- 
ious land,"  which  was  no  doubt  *'  consumed "  by 
having  to  furnish  supplies  for  his  army.  But  he  did 
not  press  forward  into  Egypt.  He  "  set  his  face  "  to 
establish  "equal  conditions"  (verse  17,  marginal 
rendering).  He  arranged  a  marriage  between  his 
daughter,  Cleopatra,  and  Ptolemy  Epiphanes,  who  had 
succeeded  his  father,  Philopator,  pledging  himself  to 
give  over  Caele-Syria  and  Palestine  to  Egypt  as  her 
dowry.  ^  He  had  no  intention,  however,  of  fulfilling 
this  part  of  the  contract.  The  provinces  were  not 
made  over;  and  Egypt  was  rather  exasperated  than 
ameliorated  by  the  transaction.  Cleopatra  herself, 
instead  of  maintaining  her  father's  interests,  opposed 
them.  Declining  to  "  stand  on  his  side,"  or  "  be  for 
him,"  she  maintained  her  husband's  rights,  and  joined 
with  him  in  looking  to  Rome  for  their  vindication 
and  establishment. 

*  Polyb.,  xxviii.  17,  §  7  ;  Appian,  "  Syriaca,"  \  4. 


CHAPTER  XXIV. 

FURTHER    NOTICES    OF    EGYPT    IN    DANIEL. 

"  After  this  shall  he  turn  his  face  unto  the  isles,  and  shall  take  many : 
but  a  prince  for  his  own  behalf  shall  cause  the  reproach  offered  by  him 
to  cease;  without  his  own  reproach  he  shall  cause  it  to  turn  upon  him. 
Then  he  shall  turn  his  face  toward  the  fort  of  his  own  land ;  but  he 
shall  stumble  and  fall,  and  not  be  found.  Then  shall  stand  up  in  his 
estate  a  raiser  of  taxes  in  the  glory  of  the  kingdom ;  but  within  few 
days  he  shall  be  destroyed,  neither  in  anger,  nor  in  battle."  (Daniel, 
ch.  xi.,  verses  18-20.) 

In  the  prophetical  Books  of  the  Old  Testament, 
and  even  in  some  of  the  historical  ones  (Gen.  x.  5  ; 
Esth.  X.  i),  the  expression  translated  "the  isles  "or 
"  the  islands,"  designates  primarily  the  shores  and  isles 
of  European  Greece — the  "  maritime  tracts  "  which  in- 
vited the  colonist  and  the  conqueror  to  brave  the  terrors 
of  the  deep,  and  journey  westward  from  Asia  in  search 
of  "  fresh  woods  and  pastures  new."  Antiochus  the 
Great,  shortly  after  concluding  his  peace  with  Philo- 
pator,  undertook  an  aggressive  movement  in  this 
direction.^  Crossing  the  Hellespont  in  B.C.  197,  he 
took  possession  of  the  Chersonese  with  its  city  of 
Lysimachla.     Five  years  later,  having  made  alliance 

*  See  Liv.  xxxv.  23,  43  ;  Polyb.  xviii.  32. 


3 1 8  BABYLON  AND  EGYPT. 

with  the  CEtolians,  he  moved  into  central  Greece, 
landing  at  Demetrias,  and  soon  afterwards  making 
himself  master  of  Chalcis,  thereby  throwing  out  a 
challenge  to  the  Romans,  which  they  were  not  slow 
to  accept.  Rome  could  not  allow  the  establishment 
of  an  Asiatic  power  in  Europe  ;  and  her  "  prince  "  for 
the  time  being,  the  consul  M.  Acilius  Glabrio,  soon 
"  caused  the  reproach  "  which  Antiochus  had  "  offered  " 
the  Romans,  *' to  cease,"  turning  it  back  upon  Anti- 
ochus himself^  by  the  decisive  victory  of  Thermopylae.^ 
Antiochus  was  forced  to  quit  Greece  in  haste, ^  and 
**  turned  his  face  toward  the  fort  "  (/.  e.  the  various 
strongholds)  "  of  his  own  land,"  whither  he  retreated 
in  the  autumn  of  B.C.  191.  But  Rome  followed  up 
her  advantage.  The  Roman  admiral,  ^milius,  swept 
the  fleet  of  Antiochus  from  the  sea.^  Her  generals, 
the  two  Scipios,  Asiaticus  and  Africanus,  invaded  Asia 
in  force;  and  in  B.C.  190  was  fought  the  great  battle 
of  Magnesia,^  which  at  once  and  forever  established 
the  predominance  of  the  Roman  arms  over  those  of 
the  Syrian  kingdom,  and  made  Rome  arbiter  of  the 
destinies  of  the  East.  At  Magnesia  Antiochus  "stum- 
bled and  fell "  with  a  fall  from  which  there  was  no 
recovery,  either  for  himself  or  for  his  kingdom.  It  did 
not  suit  Rome  at  once  to  enter  into  possession ;  but  from 

^  This  seems  to  be  the  true  meaning  of  the  last  clause  of  verse  18. 
(See  "  Speaker's  Commentary,"  vol.  vi.,  p.  379.) 

^Liv.  xxxvi.  18,  19.  3  Ibid.,  xxxvi.  21.  ^Ibid.,  xxxvii.  30. 

^Polyb.    xxi.    13;    xxii.    8;    Liv.    xxxvii.   42;    Appian,  "Syriaca," 


NOTICES  IN  DANIEL,  319 

the  date  of  the  Magnesian  defeat  Syria  lay  at  her  mercy 
and  was  practically  her  vassal.  Shortly  afterwards 
(b.c.  187)  Antiochus  "was  not  found."  He  made  an 
expedition  into  the  Eastern  provinces,^  to  collect  money 
for  the  payment  of  the  Roman  war  contribution,  and 
never  returned  from  it.  P^umour  said  that  his  exac- 
tion^ provoked  a  tumult  in  the  distant  Elymais,  and  that 
he  fell  a  victim  to  the  fury  of  the  plundered  people.^  He 
was  succeeded  by  his  son,  Seleucus  IV.  (Philopator), 
who  seems  to  be  called  "a  raiser  of  taxes"  on  account 
of  the  burdens  which  the  weight  of  the  Roman 
indemnity  compelled  him  to  lay  on  his  subjects, 
and  "the  glory  of  the  kingdom"  in  derision.^  He 
was  a  weak  and  undistinguished  monarch,  whose 
short  reign  of  eleven  years  was  wholly  uneventful. 
His  treasurer,  Heliodorus,  murdered  him  treacher- 
ously in  cold  blood, ^  not  having  any  grievance  against 
him,  but  simply  in  the  hope  of  succeeding  to  his 
dominions.  Thus  he  was  "  destroyed,  not  in  anger, 
nor  in  battle,"  by  an  ambitious  subject. 

"  And  in  his  estate  shall  stand  up  a  vile  person,  to  whom  they  shall 
not  give  the  honour  of  the  kingdom  :  but  he  shall  come  in  peaceably, 
and  obtain  the  kingdom  by  flatteries.  And  with  the  arms  of  a  flood 
shall  they  be  overflown  before  him;  yea,  also  the  prince  of  the  covenant. 
And  after  the  league  made  with  him  he  shall  work  deceitfully ;  for  he 
shall  come  up,  and  shall  become  strong  with  a  small  people.     He  shall 

1  Porphyr.  ap.  Euseb.  "  Chron.  Can."  I.  40,  \  12. 

2  Justin,  xxxii,  2;  Strab.  xvi.,  p,  744. 

3 Our  version  gives   "in  the  gloiy  of  the  kingdom;"  but  the  word 
"in"  is  wanting  in  the  original. 
*Appian,  "Syriaca,"  \  45. 


320  BAB YL ON  AND  EGYPT. 

enter  peaceably  even  upon  the  fattest  places  of  the  province ;  and  he 
shall  do  that  vi^hich  his  fathers  have  not  done,  nor  his  fathers'  fathers ; 
he  shall  scatter  among  them  the  prey,  and  spoil,  and  riches  ;  yea,  and 
he  shall  forecast  his  devices  against  the  strongholds,  even  for  a  time." 
(Dan.  xi.  21-24.) 

Antiochus  Epiphanes,  who  succeeded  his  brother, 
Seleucus  IV.,  is  almost  certainly  intended  by  the  "  vile 
person  "  of  this  passage.  He  was  a  man  of  an  extraor- 
dinary character.  Dean  Stanley  calls  him  one  of  those 
strange  characters  in  whom  an  eccentricity  touching 
insanity  on  the  left  and  genius  on  the  right  combined 
with  absolute  power  and  lawless  passion  to  produce  a 
portentous  result,  thus  bearing  out  the  two  names  by 
which  he  was  known — Epiphanes — "  the  Brilliant,"  and 
Epitnanes — "  the  Madman."  ^  He  was  "  a  fantastic 
creature,  without  dignity  or  self-control,  who  carica- 
tured the  manners  and  dress  of  the  august  Roman 
magistrates,  startled  young  revellers  by  bursting  in  on 
them  with  pipe  and  horn,  tumbled  with  the  bathers  on 
the  slippery  marble  pavement,  and  in  the  procession 
which  he  organized  at  Daphne,  appeared  riding  in  and 
out  on  a  hack  pony,  playing  the  part  of  chief  waiter, 
mountebank,  and  jester."^  He  was  not  the  legitimate 
heir  to  the  throne ;  and  "  the  honour  of  the  kingdom" 
was  in  no  way  formally  conferred  on  him.  Nor  did  he 
establish  himself  by  force  of  arms.  On  the  contrary, 
he  "  came  in  peaceably,"  under  the  auspices  of  Eu- 
menes  of  Pergamos,^  and  "  obtained  the  kingdom  "  by 

'  Stanley,  "  Lectures  on  the  Jewish  Church,"  Am.  Ed.,  vol.  iii.,  p.  254. 
^Ibid.  SAppian,  1.  s.  c. 


-  NOTICES  IN  DANIEL.  321 

bribes,  cajolery,  and  "  flatteries."  He  courted  the 
favour  of  the  Syrian  lower  classes,  of  Rome,  and  of 
the  Hellenising  party  among  the  Jews.  At  a  later 
date  "  with  the  arms  of  a  flood  "  he  "  overflowed,"  and 
carried  all  before  him,  sweeping  through  Caele-Syria 
and  Palestine  into  Egypt,^  and  receiving  the  submis- 
sion of  Jason, ^  the  High-Priest  of  the  Jews,  or  "prince 
of  the  covenant,"  who  "  made  a  league "  with  him, 
engaging  to  support  his  interests  in  Judaea,  and  to  pay 
him  an  annual  tribute  of  440  silver  talents.  Anti- 
ochus,  however,  after  this  league,  "worked  deceitfully," 
transferring  the  High  Priesthood  from  Jason  to  his 
brother  Menelaus  on  receipt  of  a  bribe,  and  forcing 
Jason  to  become  a  fugitive  from  his  country.^  After 
this  he  was  able,  through  the  support  of  Menelaus,  to 
"  become  strong "  in  Palestine,  without  maintaining 
there  more  than  a  "  small  "  army.  He  entered  peace- 
ably upon  the  "  fattest  places  of  the  province,"  his 
authority  being  generally  recognized  throughout  the 
fertile  tract  betv/een  Syria  Proper  and  Egypt,  though  it 
belonged  of  right  to  Ptolemy.  That  he  maintained 
his  influence  in  the  tract  by  means  of  a  lavish  expen- 
diture of  money,  though  not  distinctly  stated  by 
profane  historians,  is  probable  enough,  since  it  was 
certainly  the  method  by  which  he  soon  afterwards 
maintained  it  in  Egypt.* 

"  And  he  shall  stir  up  his  power  and  his  courage  against  the  king  of 
the  south  with  a  great  army ;  and  the  king  of  the  south  shall  be  stirred 

1 1  Mac.  i.  17  ;  Appian,  "Syriaca,"  \  66. 

22  Mac.  iv.  7-10.  ^2  Mac.  iv.  23-26.  *Polyb.  xxviii.  17. 

21 


322  BAB  YL ON  AND  EG  YPT. 

up  to  battle  with  a  very  great  and  mighty  army ;  but  he  shall  not 
stand ;  for  they  shall  forecast  devices  against  him.  Yea,  they  that  feed 
of  the  portion  of  his  meat  shall  destroy  him,  and  his  army  shall  over- 
flow ;  and  many  shall  fall  down  slain.  And  both  these  kings'  hearts 
shall  be  to  do  mischief,  and  they  shall  speak  lies  at  qne  table ;  but  it 
shall  not  prosper;  for  yet  the  end  shall  be  at  the  time  appointed."  (Dan. 
xi.  25-27.) 

Epiphanes  invaded  Egypt  several  times  during  the 
earlier  portion  of  his  reign.  The  prophetic  vision 
vouchsafed  to  Daniel  did  not  very  clearly  distinguish 
between  the  several  attacks.  If  the  present  passage  is 
to  be  assigned  to  any  particular  year,  it  must  be  to 
B.C.  171,  when  Epiphanes  "entered  Egypt  with  a  great 
multitude,  with  chariots,  and  elephants,  and  horsemen, 
and  with  a  great  navy"  (i  Mac.  i.  17).  Egypt  was 
then  under  the  sovereignty  of  Ptolemy  VI.  (Philo- 
metor),  who,  however,  was  still  a  minor,  under  the 
tutelage  of  Eulaeus  and  Lennaeus,  who  received  the 
royal  authority  as  regents.^  These  chiefs  collected  as 
large  a  force  as  they  could  to  resist  the  Syrian 
monarch ;  but  the  result  of  the  battle  which  took 
place  near  Pelusium,^  was  the  complete  defeat  of  the 
Egyptians,  and  the  temporary  subjection  of  the  larger 
part  of  Egypt  to  the  authority  of  Antiochus.  Ptolemy 
Philometor  fell  into  his  enemy's  hands,  but  was  hon- 
ourably treated,  the  policy  of  Antiochus  being  to 
cajole  Philometor  into  believing  that  he  was  his  friend, 
bent  on  supporting  his  authority  against  that  of  his 
brother,    Physcon,   who   had   a   strong   party  in   the 

iPolyb,  xxviii.  17;  Hieronym.  ed.  Dan.  xi. 
2  Liv.  xliv.  19  ;  Polyb.  xxvii.  17. 


NOTICES  IN  DANIEL, 


323 


country,  especially  at  Alexandria.  We  have  no  full 
account,  in  any  profane  writer,  of  the  history  of  the 
period ;  but  it  is  quite  possible  that  the  loss  of  the 
battle  of  Pelusium  was  owing  to  treachery  on  the  part 
of  some  of  Philometor's  ministers  (verse  26)  ;  and  it 
is  certain  that  in  the  intercourse  between  him  and 
Epiphanes  each  king  was  trying  to  deceive  and  overr 
reach  the  other  (verse  27).  Nothing  decisive  was 
accomplished,  however,  as  yet ;  **  the  end "  was 
reserved  for  "  the  time  appointed  "  (ibid.). 

"  Then  shall  he  return  into  his  land  with  great  riches ;  and  his  heart 
shall  be  against  the  holy  covenant ;  and  he  shall  do  exploits ;  and  return 
to  his  own  land.  At  the  time  appointed  he  shall  return,  and  come 
toward  the  south ;  but  it  shall  not  be  as  the  former,  or  as  the  latter " 
(rather  "  it  shall  not  be  at  the  latter  time  as  at  the  former  ").  "  For  the 
ships  of  Chittim  shall  come  against  him ;  therefore  he  shall  be  grieved 
and  leturn,  and  have  indignation  against  the  holy  covenant.  (Dan. 
xi.  28-30.) 

That  Epiphanes  on  his  first  invasion  of  Egypt  ob- 
tained a  considerable  booty,  which  he  carried  off  into 
Syria,  is  confirmed  by  the  First  Book  of  Maccabees 
(i.  19).  That  on  his  return,  or  soon  after,  his  "heart 
was  against  the  holy  covenant"  appears  both  from 
I  Mac.  i.  20-24  and  from  2  Mac.  v.  11-21.  That 
after  one  or  two  years,  he  "returned,  and  once  more 
came  toward  the  south,"  is  also  certain,  as  likewise 
that  he  did  not  fare  this  time  so  well  as  previously, 
since,  though  success  attended  his  arms,  he  was 
"compelled  by  the  ambassadors  of  various  northern 
kingdoms,"  supported  by  the  "ships  of  Chittim" — 


324 


BAB  YL  ON  AND  E  G  YPT. 


i.  €.,  the  fleets  of  Rome  and  Rhodes,  to  surrender 
against  his  will  almost  all  the  advantages  that  he  had 
gained.^  This  time  he  returned  from  Egypt  in  extreme 
ill  temper,  and  vented  his  spleen  on  the  Jews  by 
renewed  attacks  and  oppressions. 

"  And  at  the  time  of  the  end  shall  the  king  of  the  south  push  at  him  ; 
and  the  king  of  the  north  shall  come  against  him,"  (/.  e.,  against  the 
king  of  the  south,)  "  like  a  whirlwind,  with  chariots,  and  with  horse- 
men, and  with  many  ships,  and  he  shall  enter  into  the  countries,  and 
shall  overflow  and  pass  over.  And  he  shall  enter  also  into  the  glorious 
land,  and  many  countries  shall  be  overthrown ;  but  these  shall  escape 
out  of  his  hand,  even  Edom,  and  Moab,  and  the  chief  of  the  children  of 
Amnion.  He  shall  stretch  forth  also  his  hand  upon  the  countries ;  and 
the  land  of  Egypt  shall  not  escape.  But  he  shall  have  power  over  the 
treasures  of  gold  and  of  silver,  and  over  all  the  precious  things  of 
Egypt ;  and  the  Libyans  and  the  Ethiopians  shall  be  at  his  steps.  But 
tidings  out  of  the  east  and  out  of  the  north  shall  trouble  him  ;  there- 
fore shall  he  go  forth  with  great  fury  to  destroy,  and  utterly  to  make 
away  many.  And  he  shall  plant  the  tabernacle  of  his  palace  between 
the  seas  in  the  glorious  holy  mountain;  yet  he  shall  come  to  his  end, 
and  none  shall  help  him."     (Dan.  xi.  40-45.) 

The  closing  scene  of  the  war  between  the  kings  of 
the  north  and  of  the  south — Epiphanes  and  the 
brothers  Philometor  and  Physcon — came  in  B.C.  168. 
Epiphanes  having  withdrawn  into  Syria  for  the  winter, 
leaving  his  supposed  ally,  Philometor,  at  Memphis, 
and  his  open  enemy,  Physcon,  in  Alexandria,  was 
staggered  by  the  information,  that,  during  his  absence, 
the  hostile  brothers  had  made  up  their  differences,  and 
that  Physcon  had  agreed  to  receive  Philometor  into 

*Ewald,  "History  of  the  Jews,"  vol.  v.,  p.  297. 


NOTICES  IN  DANIEL.  325 


Alexandria/  at  which  place  the  reconciled  enemies 
were  now  holding  their  courts  conjointly.  An  em- 
bassy, which  met  Epiphanes,  at  Rhinocolura,  politely 
suggested  to  him,  that  the  end  for  which  he  had  been 
waging  war — the  establishment  of  Philometor's  author- 
ity— was  accomplished,  and  that  nothing  remained  for 
him  but  to  sheath  his  sword  and  return  home.  This 
was  felt  by  Antiochus  as  a  deadly  blow  struck  at  his 
schemes — a  "  push  "  on  the  part  of  the  "  king  of  the 
south,"  which  required  to  be  met  by  the  promptest 
and  most  energetic  measures.  He  at  once  broke  up 
his  camp,  and  marched  into  Egypt  as  an  open  enemy. 
With  the  speed  of  a  "  whirlwind,"  he  advanced  upon 
Pelusium,  "with  chariots,  and  with  horsemen,  and 
with  many  ships  "  (verse  40) ;  thence,  in  a  more 
leisurely  fashion,  he  proceeded  to  march  upon  Alex- 
andria. Egypt  generally  submitted  to  him.  The 
"  treasures  of  gold  and  silver,"  and  "  all  the  precious 
things  of  Egypt "  were  placed  at  his  disposal  by  the 
inhabitants — contingents  of  Egyptian  troops  were 
pressed  into  his  service,^  and  "  the  Libyans  and  the 
Ethiopians,"  long  employed  as  auxiliaries  by  the 
monarchs  of  Egypt,  whether  native  or  foreign,  were 
(as  a  matter  of  course)  "  at  his  steps  "  (verse  43).  He 
was  drawing  near  Alexandria  with  the  intention  of 
renewing  the  siege,  and  with  an  almost  certain  prospect 
of  reducing  the  place  within  a  few  months,  when  an 
unexpected  obstacle  was  interposed.  The  prophetic 
vision  speaks  of  "  tidings  out  of  the  east  and  out  of 

^  Livy,  xlv.  II.  ^  Ibid.,  xlv.  12. 


326  BAB  YL  ON  AND  E  G  YPT. 

the  north."  The  "  tidings  "  told  of  the  near  approach 
of  a  small  body  of  Romans.  These  proved  to  be 
ambassadors.  At  their  head  was  a  man,  who  has  left 
an  imperishable  name  in  history,  C.  Popillius  Loenas. 
This  bold  and  haughty  envoy,  approaching  with  his 
small  retinue,  the  master  of  countless  legion  held  out 
to  him  a  small  tablet,  containing  a  short  senatorial 
decree.  "  Read  this,"  he  said,  "  at  once."  The 
cautious  Greek  cast  his  eye  over  the  document,  and 
perceived  that  it  was  a  positive  command  to  him  to 
desist  from  hostilities  against  those  who  were  "  the 
friends  of  the  Roman  people."  Unwilling  to  see  the 
prize  of  victory  snatched  from  his  grasp  at  the 
moment  of  success,  and  hoping  to  temporize,  Anti- 
ochus  replied,  that  he  would  consult  his  friends  on  the 
senatorial  proposals  and  let  the  envoys  have  an  answer. 
Popillius  had  a  wand  in  his  hand,  the  emblem  of  the 
ambassadorial  office.  Hastily  tracing  with  it  a  circle 
on  the  sand  round  Antiochus,  "  Consult,"  he  said, 
"  and  give  your  answer  before  you  overstep  this  line." 
The  Syrian  monarch  was  so  astonished  and  so  dis- 
mayed that  he  replied,  with  the  utmost  meekness,  "  I 
will  do  as  the  Senate  decrees."  ^  Thus  were  baffled  and 
confounded  the  ambitious  designs  of  the  "  great  king," 
who  regarded  himself  as  the  successor  of  Cyrus, 
Darius,  and  Xerxes,  and  the  living  representative  of 
Alexander  the  Great.  A  brief  sentence  uttered  by  a 
Roman  civilian  brought  a  great  war  to  an  end  and 
prohibited  its  renewal. 

^  Polyb.  xxix.  II,  \  i-6;  Liv.  xlv.  12. 


NOTICES  IN  DANIEL.  327 

Epiphanes  retired  from  Egypt  in  greater  dudgeon 
than  ever,  "  deeply  grieved  and  groaning  in  spirit,"  as 
Polybius  says,^  and  sought  a  species  of  consolation  in 
increased  severity  towards  the  Jews.  It  was  now  that 
he  accomplished  his  last  acts  of  impiety  and  cruelty 
upon  that  unfortunate  people,  sending  against  them 
"  Apollonius,  that  detestable  ringleader,  with  an  army 
of  two  and  twenty  thousand,  commanding  him  to  slay 
all  those  who  were  in  their  best  age,  and  to  sell  the 
women  and 'the  younger  sort  "(2  Mac.  v.  24),  and 
soon  afterwards  polluting  the  temple  in  Jerusalem, 
and  wholly  forbidding  the  exercise  of  the  Jewish 
religion.  It  was  this  issue  to  the  wars  between  the 
"  kings  of  the  north  and  of  the  south  "  that  gave  to 
them  their  great  importance  in  the  theocratic  history, 
and  rendered  them  a  fitting  subject  for  so  long  a 
prophecy  as  that  which  we  have  been  considering. 
Their  entire  result  was,  to  bring  out,  more  strongly 
than  it  had  ever  been  brought  out  before,  the  Roman 
influence  over  the  affairs  of  the  East,  to  intensify  the 
antagonism  between  Rome  and  Syria,  to  place  Egypt 
under  a  permanent  Roman  protectorate,  and  to  make 
Rome  the  natural  ally  and  defender  of  every  petty 
nationality  which  had  any  inclination  to  assert  itself 
against  Syria,  and  could  do  so  with  the  least  hope  of 
success.  The  close  connection  between  the  Roman 
and  Jewish  peoples,  which,  beginning  with  the  embassy 
of  Judus  Maccabaeus  in  B.C.  161  (i  Mac.  viii.  17-32) 
terminated  in  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem  by  Titus 

^/5apwd//£vof /zfi' /cci  cTifvwv  xxix.  II,  ^  8. 


328  BAB  YLON  AND  EG  YPT. 

in  A.  D.  70,  was  the  consequence  of  the  Syro-Egyptian 
struggle,  and  especially  of  the  war  between  Epiphanes 
and  Philometor,  which  therefore  worthily  occupies  a 
very  considerable  space  in  the  prophetical  synopsis 
of  Daniel. 

The  ultimate  fates  of  Egypt  and  Babylon,  as  repre- 
sented to  us  in  Scripture,  offer  a  remarkable  contrast. 
Babylon  is  to  "become  heaps"  (Jer.  li.  37) ;  to  be 
"wholly  desolate"  (ib.  1.  13);  "not  to  be  inhabited" 
(Isa.  xiii.  20.)  Egypt  is  to  be  a  "  base  kingdom " 
(Ezek.  xxix.  14) ;  "  the  basest  of  the  kingdoms  "  (ib. 
verse  1 5) ;  but  still  to  remain  a  kingdom.  It  is  not 
"  to  exalt  itself  any  more  above  the  nations ; "  it  is  to  be 
"  diminished ; "  it  is  no  more  to  have  "  any  rule  over  the 
nations  "  (ib.),  or  to  be  "  the  confidence  of  the  house 
of  Israel."  But  it  is  to  maintain  a  certain  position 
among  the  powers  of  the  earth,  a  certain  separateness, 
a  certain  low  consideration.  Now  this  is  exactly  what 
has  been  the  general  position  of  Egypt  from  her  con- 
quest by  Cambyses  to  the  present  day.  Under  the 
Persians  she  was  a  sort  of  outlying  kingdom,  rather 
than  an  ordinary  satrapy.  She  frequently  revolted 
and  established  a  temporary  independence,  but  was 
soon  coerced  into  subjection.  During  the  earlier  por- 
tion of  the  Ptolemaic  period,  she  rose  to  considerable 
influence  and  prosperity ;  but  still  she  was  never 
more  than  a  second-rate  power.  Syria  always,  and 
Macedonia  sometimes,  was  superior  to  her  in  extent  of 
dominion,  power  and  importance  (Dan.  xi.  5).  Rome 
made  her  a  province,  but  a  province  with  a  certain 


NOTICES  IN  DANIEL.  329 

separateness,  under  regulations  which  were  peculiar.^ 
Under  the  Mohammedans,  whether  Arabs,  Saracens,  or 
Turks,  she  has  still  for  the  most  part  been  secondary, 
either  an  actual  dependency  on  some  greater  state,  or 
at  any  rate  overshadowed  by  rivals  of  superior  dignity. 
A  veil  hangs  over  the  future ;  but,  so  far  as  human 
sagacity  can  forecast,  there  seems  to  be  little  likelihood 
of  any  vital  change  in  her  position.  With  peculiar 
characteristics  and  an  isolated  position,  she  must 
almost  of  necessity  maintain  her  separate  and  distinct 
individuality,  even  though  she  become  a  dependency 
on  a  European  power.  On  the  other  hand,  she  has 
exhibited  under  recent  circumstances  no  elements  of 
greatness,  and  remains  emphatically  "  a  base  king- 
dom" — if  not  even  "the  basest  of  the  kingdoms." 
There  seems  to  be  no  elements  out  of  which  her 
revival  and  reconstitution  as  a  great  kingdom  could 
be  possible. 


1  Tacit  "Ann."  ii.  59. 


28* 


THE   END. 


The  Religions  of  the  Ancient  World 

Including  Egypt,  Assyria  and  Babylonia,  Persia,  India, 
Phoenicia,  Etruria,  Greece,  Rome. 

By   GEORGE    RAWLINSON,    M.A. 


One  Volume,  12mo,  -  _  _  -       $1,00, 

Uniform  with  "  The  Origin  of  Nations." 

Canon  Rawlinson's  great  learning  and  his  frequent  contribu- 
tions to  the  history  of  ancient  nations  qualify  him  to  treat  the 
subject  of  this  volume  with  a  breadth  of  view  and  accuracy  of 
knowledge  that  few  other  writers  can  lay  claim  to.  The  treatise 
is  not  intended  to  give  an  exhaustive  review  of  ancient  religions, 
but  to  enable  the  students  of  history  to  form  a  more  accurate 
apprehension  of  the  inner  life  of  the  ancient  world. 

"  The  historical  studies  which  have  elevated  this  author's  works  to  the 
highest  position  have  made  him  familiar  with  those  beliefs  which  once  di- 
rected the  world's  thought ;  and  he  has  done  literature  no  better  service 
than  in  this  little  volume.  .  .  ,  .  The  book  is,  then,  to  be  accepted 
as  a  sketch,  and- as  the  most  trustworthy  sketch  in  our  language,  of  the  re- 
ligions discussed." — JV.  Y.  Christian  Advocate. 

piE  ORIGIN  OF  NATIONS 

t'l:     :    By  Professor  GEORGE  RAWLINSON,  M.A. 


Oriei  Volume,  12mo.     With  maps,         -       -         $1,00, 


The  first  part  of  this  book,  Early  Civilizations,  discusses  the 
antiquity  of  civilization  in  Egypt  and  the  other  early  nations  of 
the  East.  The  second  part.  Ethnic  Affinities  in  the  Ancient 
World,  is  an  examination  of  the  ethnology  of  Genesis,  showing 
its  accordance  with  the  latest  results  of  modern  ethnographical 
science. 

•'  An  attractive  volume,  which  is  well  worthy  of  the  careful  consideration 
of  every  reader." — Observer. 

''  A  work  of  genuine  scholarly  excellence  and  a  useful  offset  to  a  great 
deal  of  the  superficial  current  literature  on  such  subjects." 

—  Congregationalist. 

"  Dr.  Rawlmson  brings  to  this  discussion  long  and  patient  r'^search,  a 
vast  knowledge  and  intimate  acquaintance  with  wnat  has  been  written  on 
both  sides  of  the  question." — Brooklyn  Union-Argus. 

*»*  For  Sale  by   all  booksellers.,  or  sent.,  />ost-/>aidy  upon  receipt  of  price  ^  by 

CHARLES  SCRIBNER'S  SONS,  Publishers, 

743  AND  745  Broadway,  New  York. 


The  Theory  of  Preaching, 

OR 

LECTURES     ON     HOMILETICS. 

By    Professor    AUSTIN    PHELPS,    D.D. 


One  volume,  8vo,         -----         $2.50 


This  work,  now  offered  to  the  public,  is  the  growth  of 
more  than  thirty  years'  practical  experience  in  teaching. 
While  primarily  designed  for  professional  readers,  it  will  be 
found  to  contain  much  that  will  be  of  interest  to  thoughtful 
laymen.  The  writings  of  a  master  of  style  of  broad  and 
catholic  mind  are  always  fascinating ;  in  the  present  case  the 
wealth  of  appropriate  and  pointed  illustration  renders  this 
doubly  the  case. 

CRITICAL    NOTICES. 

"  In  the  range  of  Protestant  homiletical  literature,  we  venture  to  affirm  that  its  equal 
cannot  be  found  for  a  conscientious,  scholarly,  and  exhaustive  treatment  of  the  theory 
and  practice  of  preaching.  *  *  *  'I'o  the  treatment  of  his  subject  Dr,  Phelps  brings 
su  ;h  qualifications  as  very  few  men  now  living  possess.  His  is  one  of  those  delicate  and 
sensitive  natures  which  are  instinctively  critical,  and  yet  full  of  what  Matthew  Arnold 
happily  calls  sweet  reasonableness.  *  *  *  lo  this  characteristic  graciousness  of 
nature  Dr.  Phelps  adds  a  style  which  is  preeminently  adapted  to  his  special  work.  It  is 
nervous,  epigrammatic,  and  racy,"" — The  JExaminer  and  Chronicle. 

"  It  is  a  wise,  spirited,  practical  and  devout  treatise  upon  a  topic  of  the  utmost  con- 
sequence to  pastors  and  people  alike,  and  tO  the  salvation  of  mankind.  It  is  elaborate 
but  not  redundant,  rich  in  the  fruits  of  experience,  yet  thoroughly  timely  and  current, 
and  it  easily  takes  the  very  first  rank  among  volumes  of  its  class. — The  Congrega- 
tioiialist. 

"The  layman  will  find  it  delightful  reading,  and  ministers  of  all  denominations  and 
of  all  degrees  of  experience  will  rejoice  in  it  as  a  veritable  mine  of  wisdom." — Ne7v  York 
Christia?t  Advocate. 

"The  volume  is  to  be  commended  to  young  men  as  a  superb  example  of  the  art  in 
which  it  aims  to  instruct  them." — The  Independettt. 

"The  reading  of  it  is  a  mental  tonic.  The  preacher  cannot  but  feel  often  his  heart 
burning  withm  him  under  its  influence.  We  could  wish  it  might  be  in  the  hands  of  every 
theological  student  and  of  every  pastor."  —  The  Watchtnan. 

"Thirty-one  years  of  experience  as  a  professor  of  homiletics  in  a  leading  American 
Theological  Seminary  by  a  man  of  genius,  learning  and  power,  are  condensed  iiito  this 
valuable  \Q\\imz.''^  —  Christian  Intelligencer. 

"  Our  professional  readers  will  make  a  great  mistake  if  they  suppose  this  volume  is 
simply  a  heavy,  monotonous  discussion,  chiefly  adapted  to  the  class-room.  It  is  a 
delightful  volume  for  general  reading.'' — Boston  ZiotCs  Herald. 


*^*  For  sale    by  all    booksellers.^    or  senl,  post-paid.,    upon     receipt  of 
price.,  by 

CHARLES  SCRIBNER'S  SONS,  Publishers, 

743  AND  745  Broadway,  New  York. 


The  Religions  of  China. 

CONFUCIANISM  AND  TAOISM   DESCRIBED  AND  COM- 
PARED WITH  CHRISTIANITY. 

By     JAMES      LEGGE, 

Professor  of  the  Chinese  Language  and  Literature  in  the  University  of  Oxford, 


One    volume,   12nio,        -  -        $1.50. 

Professor  Legge's  work  is  by  far  the  most  simple  and  easily 
comprehended  exposition  of  Chinese  religions  that  exists,  and 
is  remarkable  for  its  freedom  from  a  polemic  bias,  and  for  the 
easy,  confident  touch  of  a  man  whose  mind  is  saturated  with 
his  subject  and  at  home  in  every  branch  of  it. 


"The  entire  volume  deserves  a  wide  and  attentive  reading."— C/«zra^<7  Tribune. 

•'  Prof.  I.eg^e  is.  perhaps,  the  highest  authority  on  all  matters  connected  with  a 
knowledge  of  the  Chinese  hterature  and  philosophy." — Richmond  Central  Presby- 
terian. 

"Prof.  Legge's  work  is  a  remarkably  instructive  and  critical  contribution  to  our 
knowledge  of  the  Chinese." — St.  Louis  Cejitral  Christian  Advocate. 

"As  the  work  of  perhaps  the  first  of  scholars  in  all  that  pertains  to  China,  we  heartily 
commend  this  book." — Bujfalo  Courier. 

"For  the  schohr  and  the  minister  who  desire  information  about  the  religions  of  the 
largest  nation  on  earth,  and  who  are  likely  to  play  an  important  part  hereafter  in  the 
history  of  the  world,  it  is  an  important  publication."' — Richniotid  Southern  Churchman. 

"  In  this  vohime  Prof.  Legge  presents  the  results  of  careful  study,  with  a  clearness  of 
style  and  method  which  entitles  him  to  the  gratitude  of  readers  who  are  mterested  in  the 
study  of  comparative  religions." — Boston  Daily  Journal. 

"Nowhere  e^se  Is  so  cleir  a  detail  of  the  disti  ctive  features  and  characteristics  of 
the  Cliinese  religions  given,  and  nowhere  else  are  the  contrasts  and  similarities  between 
them  and  the  Christian  religion  brought  within  a  more  compact  compass." — 

Albany  Journal, 

"Prof.  Legge's  philological  (discussions  are  extremely  interesting,  and  his  reasoning 
close  and  fascinating.  Incidentally  he  gives  us  an  insight  into  the  social  and  family  re- 
lations of  the  Chinese,  which  are  involved  in  and  governed  by  the  duties  and  obligations 
imposed  by  religion." — Waterbury  American. 


*Ai*  For    sale  by    all   booksellers,  or    sent,  post-paid,  upon    receipt    of 
frice,  by 

CHARLES   SCRIBNER'S   SONS,  Publishers, 

743  AND  745  Broadway,  New  York. 


OUTLINES   OF  PRIMITIVE  BELIEF 

among  the  Indo-European  Kaces. 

By  CHARLES  FRANCIS  KEARY,  M.A., 

of  the  British  Museum. 


One  vol,  crown  8vo,,         -  -  -.  -         $2*50, 

Mr.  Keary's  Book  is  not  simply  a  series  of  essays  in  comparative  myth- 
ology, it  is  a  history  of  the  legendary  beliefs  of  the  Indo-European  races 
drawn  from  their  language  and  literature.  Mr.  Keary  has  no  pet  theory  to 
establish;  he  proceeds  in  the  spirit  of  the  inquirer  after  truth  simply,  and 
his  book  is  a  rare  example  of  patient  research  and  unbiased  opinion  in  a  most 
fascinating  field  of  exploration. 

"  We  have  an  important  and  singularly  interesting  contribution  to  our  knowledge 
of  pre-historic  creeds  jn  the  Outlines  of  pre^historic  Belie/ among  the  Indo-European. 
Races^  by  Mr.  C.  F.  Keary,  of  the  British  Museum.  No  contemporary  essayist  in 
the  field  of  comparative  mythology — and  we  do  not  except  Max  Miiller— has  known 
how  to  embellish  and  illumine  a  work  of  scientific  aims  and  colid  worth  with  so  much 
imaginative  power  and  Hterary  charm.  There  are  chapters  in  this  volume  that  are  as 
persuasive  as  a  paper  of  Matthew  Arnold's,  as  delightful  as  a  poem.  The  author  is 
not  only  a  trained  inquirer  but  he  presents  the  fruits  of  hin  research  with  the  skill  an^ 
felicity  of  an  artist." — New  York  itun, 

"Mr.  Keary,  having  unusual  advantages  in  the  British  Museum  for  studying 
comparative  philology,  has  gone  through  all  the  authorities  concerning  Hindoo, 
Greek,  early  Norse,  modern  European,  and  other  forms  of  faith  in  their  early  stages, 
and  there  has  never  before  been  so  thorough  and  so  captivating  an  exposition  of  them 
as  that  given  in  this  book." — Philadelphia  Bulletin. 

THE  DAWN  OF  history" 

AN  INTRODUCTION  TO  PRE-HISTORIC  STUDY. 
Edited  by  C„  F.   KEARY,  M.A., 

OF   THE    BRITISH    MUSEUM. 


One  Volume,  12mo.,  -  -  -  $1.2S. 

This  work  treats  successive'y  of  the  earliest  traces  of  man  in  the  re- 
mains discovered  in  caves  or  Isewhere  in  different  parts  of  Europe  ;  of 
language,  its  growth,  and  the  story  it  tells  of  the  pre  historic  users  of  it ;  of 
the  races  of  mankind,  early  social  life,  the  religions,  mythologies,  and  folk- 
tales of  mankind,  and  of  the  history  of  writmg.  A  list  of  authorities  is 
appended,  and  an  index  has  beeu  prepared  specially  for  this  edition. 


''  The  book  may  be  heartily  recommended  as  probably  the  most  satisfactory 
summary  of  the  subject  that  there  is." — Nation. 

''  A  fascinating  manual,  without  a  vestige  of  the  dullness  usually  charged  against 
scientific  works,  o  .  „  In  its  way,  fhe  work  is  a  model  of  what  a  popular  scientific 
work  should  be ;  it  is  readable,  it  is  easily  understood,  and  its  style  is  simple,  yet  dig- 
nified, avoiding  equally  the  affection  of  the  nursery  and  of  the  laboratory."— 

Boston  Sat.  Eve.  Gazette, 

***  For  sale  by  all  booksellers,  or  sent,  post-paid  upon  receipt  0/ 
price,  by 

CHARLES  SCRIBNER'S  SONS,  Publishers, 

743  AND  745  Broadway,  New  York. 


THE  BEGINNINGS  OF  H ISTORY 

According  to  the  Bible  and  the  Traditions  of  the  Oriental  Peoples.  From 
the  Creation  of  Man  to  the  Deluge.  By  Francois  Lenormant, 
Professor  of  Archoeology  at  the  National  Library  of  France,  etc. 
(Translated  from  the  Second  French  Edition),  With  an  introduction 
by  Francis  Brown,  Associate  Professor  in  Biblical  Philology, 
Union  Theological  Seminary. 


1  Vol,,  12mo,  600  pages,        -  -  «        $2,50. 

'•  What  should  we  see  in  the  first  chapters  of  Genesis  ?  "  writes  M.  Lenor- 
mant in  his  preface— "A  revealed  narrative,  or  a  human  tradition,  gathered 
up  for  preservation  by  inspired  writers  as  the  oldest  memory  of  their  race  ? 
This  is  the  problem  which  I  have  been  led  to  examine  by  comparing  the  nar- 
rative of  the  Bible  with  those  which  were  current  among  the  civilized  peo- 
ples of  most  ancient  origin  by  which  Israel  was  surrounded,  and  from  the 
midst  of  which  it  came." 

The  book  is  not  more  erudite  than  it  is  absorbing  in  its  interest.  It  has 
bad  an  immense  influence  upon  contemporary  thought ;  and  has  approached 
its  task  w^ith  an  unusual  mingling  of  the  reverent  and  the  scientific  spirit. 


"  That  the  '  Oriental  Peoples  '  had  legends  on  the  Creation,  the  Fall  of  Man,  the 
Deluge,  and  other  primitive  events,  there  is  no  denying.  Nor  is  there  any  need  of 
denying  it,  as  this  admirable  volume  shows.  Mr.  Lenormant  is  not  only  a  believer 
in  revelation,  but  a  devout  confessor  of  what  came  by  Moses  ;  as  well  as  of  what  came 
by  Christ.  In  this  explanation  of  Chaldean,  Babylonian,  Assyrian  and  Phenician 
tradition,  he  discloses  a  prodigality  of  thought  and  skill  allied  to  great  variety  of  pur- 
suit, and  diligent  manipulation  of  what  he  has  secured.  He  '  spoils  the  Egyptians ' 
by  boldly  using  for  Christian  purposes  materials,  which,  if  left  unused,  might  be 
turned  against  the  credibility  of  the  Mosaic  records. 

"  From  the  mass  of  tradition  here  examined  it  would  seem  that  if  these  ancient 
legends  have  a  common  basis  of  truth,  the  first  part  of  Genesis  stands  more  generally 
related  to  the  religious  history  of  mankind,  than  if  it  is  taken  primarily  as  one  account, 
by  one  man,  to  one  people.  .  .  .  While  not  claiming  for  the  author  the 
setting  forth  of  the  absolute  truth,  nor  the  drawing  from  what  he  has  set  forth  the 
soundest  conclusions,  we  can  assure  our  readers  of  a  diminishing  fear  of  learned  un- 
belief after  the  perusal  of  this  work." — TAg  New  Englander. 

"  With  reference  to  the  book  as  a  whole  it  may  be  said  :  (i).  That  nowhere  else  can 
one  obtain  the  mass  of  information  upon  this  subject  in  so  convenient  a  form;  (2).  That 
the  investigation  is  conducted  in  a  truly  scientific  manner,  and  with  an  eminently 
Christian  spirit  ;  (3).  That  the  results,  though  very  different  from  those  in  common 
acceptance,  contain  much  that  is  interesting  and  to  say  the  least,  plausible  ;  (4).  That 
the  author  while  he  seems  in  a  number  of  cases  to  be  injudicious  in  his  state- 
ments and  conclusions,  has  done  work  in  investigation  and  in  working  out  details  that 
will  be  of  service  to  all,  whether  general  readers  or  specialists."— Z-^^  Hebrew 
Student. 

"  The  work  is  one  that  deserves  to  be  studied  by  all  students  of  ancient  history,  and 
in  particular  by  ministers  of  the  Gospel,  whose  office  requires  them  to  interpret  the 
Scriptures,  and  who  ought  not  to  be  ignorant  of  the  latest  and  most  interesting  con- 
tribution of  science  to  the  elucidation  to  the  sacred  volume." — New  York  Tribune. 


*^*  For  Sale  by  all  booksellers,  or  sent,  post-paid,  upon  receipt  of  price, 

CHARLES   SCRIBNER'S   SONS,  Publishers, 

743  AND  745  Broadway,  New  York. 


Final  Causes, 

MEMBER   OF   THE   FRENCH    ACADEMY. 

Translated  from  the  Second  French  Edition.     With  a  Preface  by 
Robert  Flint,  D.D.,  LL.D, 


One    Vol.    8vo.,       -       -       -        Price,    $2.50 


"  Here  is  a  book  to  which  we  give  the  heartiest  welcome  and  the  study  of 
which — not  reading  merely — we  commend  to  all  who  are  seeking  to  solve  the  question 
whether  the  universe  is  the  product  of  mind  or  of  chance.  .  .  .  Perhaps  no  living 
author  has  been  more  thoroughly  trained  by  previous  studies  for  the  work  done  here 
than  Mr.  Janet ;  and  no  one  is  better  fitted  for  it  by  original  gifts." — Universalist 
Quarterly, 

"  I  regard  '  Janet's  Final  Causes'  as  incomparably  the  best  thing  in  litera- 
ture on  the  subject  of  which  it  treats,  and  that  it  ought  to  be  in  the  hands  of  every 
man  who  has  any  interest  in  the  present  phases  of  the  theistic  problem.  I  am  very 
glad  that  you  have  brought  out  an  edition  for  the  American  public  and  at  a  price 
that  makes  the  work  acceptable  to  ministers  and  students.  I  have  commended  it  to 
my  classes  in  the  seminary,  and  make  constant  use  of  it  in  my  instructions." — Frotn 
a  letter  of  Professor  Francis  L.  Patton^  D.  D. 

"  I  am  delighted  that  you  have  published  the  translation  of  Janet's  '  Final 
Causes '  in  an  improved  form  and  at  a  price  which  brings  it  within  the  reach  of  many 
v/ho  desire  to  possess  it.  It  is  in  my  opinion  the  most  suggestive  treatise  on  this  im- 
portant topic  which  is  accessible  in  our  language,  and  is  admirably  fitted  to  meet 
many  of  the  misleading  and  superficial  tendencies  of  the  philosophy  of  a  popular 
but  superficial  school.''''  —Extract  from  a  letter  of  Noa/t  Porter,  D.D.,  LL.D., 
President  of  Yale  College. 

"  The  most  powerful  argument  that  has  yet  appeared  against  the  unwar- 
ranted conclusions  which  Haeckel  and  others  would  draw  from  the  Darwinian 
Theory.  That  teleology  and  evolution  are  not  mutually  exclusive  theories,  M. 
Janet  has  demonstrated  with  a  vigor  and  keenness  that  admit  of  no  reply." — The 
Examitier. 

"  No  book  of  greater  importance  in  the  realm  of  theological  philosophy  has 
appeared  during  the  past  twenty  years  than  Paul  Janet's  '  Final  Causes.'  The 
central  idea  of  the  work  is  one  which  the  whole  course  of  scientific  discussion  has 
made  the  burning  question  of  the  day,  viz :  That  final  causes  are  not  inconsistent 
with  physical  causation." — I)ideJ>endent, 


*^*  For  sale  by  all  booksellers,  or  sent,  post-paid.,  upon  receipt  of  price,  by 

CHARLES  SCRIJBNER'S  SONS,  Publishers, 

743  AND  745  Broadway,  New  York. 


The 

J 


Conflict  of  Christianity 

WITH    HEATHENISM. 

By  DR.    GERHARD     UHLHORN. 

TRANSLATED     BY 
PROF.  EGBERT    C.  SMYTH    and    REV.  C.  J.  H.  ROPES. 


OvxQ    Volui-ne,    Crown    8vo,   $2.50. 

This  volume  describes  with  extraordinary  vividness  and  spirit  the 
religious  and  moral  condition  of  the  Pagan  world,  the  rise  and  spread 
of  Christianity,  its  conflict  with  heathenism,  and  its  final  victory.  There 
is  no  work  that  portrays  the  heroic  age  of  the  ancient  church  with  equal 
spirit,  elegance,  and  incisive  power.  The  author  has  made  thorough  and 
independent  study  both  of  the  early  Christian  literature  and  also  of  the 
contemporary  records  of  classic  heathenism. 


CRIT1C.\I.     NOTICES. 

"  It  is  easy  to  see  why  this  volume  is  so  highly  esteemed.  It  is 
systematic,  thorough,  and  concise.  But  its  power  is  in  the  wide  mental 
vision  and  well-balanced  imagination  of  the  author,  which  enable  him  to 
reconstruct  the  scenes  of  ancient  history.  An  exceptional  clearness  and 
force  mark  his  style." — Boston  Advey-tiser. 

"  One  might  read  many  books  without  obtaining  more  than  a  fraction 
of  the  profitable  information  here  conveyed  ;  and  he  might  search  a  long 
time  before  finding  one  wliich  would  so  thoroughly  fix  his  attention  and 
command  his  interest." — P/i//.   S.  S.    Times. 

"Dr.  Uhlhorn  has  described  the  great  conflict  with  the  power  of  a 
master.  His  style  is  strong  and  attractive,  his  descriptions  vivid  and 
graphic,  his  illustrations  highly  colored,  and  his  presentation  of  the  subject 
earnest  and  effective." — Provide7ice  yo!/r?tal. 

"The  work  is  marked  for  its  broad  humanitarian  views,  its  learning, 
and  the  wide  discretion  in  selecting  from  the  great  field  the  points  of 
deepest  interest." — Chicago  Inter-Ocean. 

"This  is  one  of  those  clear,  strong,  thorough-going  books  which  are 
a  scholar's  delight." — Hartford  Religious  Herald. 


*■■* 
')rice^    by 


CHARLES    SCRIHNER'S    SONS, 

Nos.  743  AND  745  Broadway,  New  York. 


THE   HIBBEIiT   ZECTZ'HES    FOR    1884. 


The  Native  Religions  of 

Mexico  and  Peru. 

By  PROFESSOR  ALBERT  REVILLE. 


1  Vol.       -        -        -        12mo.       -        -        -        $1.50 


The  remarkable  series  of  lectures  on  the  Hibbert  foundation, 
which  includes  the  widely  known  volumes  of  Max  Muller, 
Renouf  and  Kuenen,  has  now  an  addition  which  will  prove  of 
equal  interest  and  value.  Professor  Reville  has  taken  for  his 
s-abject  the  religions  of  the  Mexicans  and  Peruvians  at  the  time 
of  the  Spanish  Conquest,  and  in  a  series  of  eloqiient  lectures  he 
describes  the  civilization,  relig-ious  customs,  monastic  institu- 
tions, and  everything-  connected  v/ith  the  mysterious  yet  pro- 
foundly sig-nificant  religion  of  these  races  of  the  New  "World. 
No  subject  could  have  been  chosen  in  this  field  of  research 
more  attractive  for  students  of  religion  in  this  country. 

Professor  Reville's  treatment  of  his  theme  is  popular  and 
historical  rather  than  philosophical,  and  it  is  consequently 
8.dapted  for  general  readers. 


The  Hibbert  Lectures  on  the  Origin  and  Growth  of  Religion. 
The  Religions  of  India— ^^'  F.  Max  Muller. 

Hibbert  LeElures  for  iS-jS.     Crown  8vo.  -  $2.00 

Ike  Religion  of  Ancient  Egypt.  —  By  p.  Le  Page  Renouf. 

Hibbert  Lectures  for  iSyg.     i2mo.  -  -  ^1.50 

National  Religions  and  Universal  Religions.— ^"^^  A.  Kuenen. 

Hibbert  Left  11  res  for  1SS2.     i2mo.  -  .  ^1.50 


***  For  sale   bv  all  booksellets,  or  sent,  post-paid,  upon   receipt' of  price, 
by 

CHARLES    SCRIBNER'S    SONS, 

Publishers,  New  York. 


DATE  DUE 


iMMM^&i 

1 

^^i3^^ 

P^*- 

. 

CAYLORO 

PRINTED  INU.S. A. 

BS1197.1.R26 

Egypt  and  Babylon  from  sacred  and 

Princeton  Theological  Seminary-Speer  Library  hi,.   ,•■  ,i  j',t» 

II!  nil  nil  nil  III!  II  mill  III!  nil  Hill    mnM 


"^^hti 


1    1012  00050  3104     m^ 

lis 


Mm 


mm 


